It is certainly intriguing to observe how little we know about the research that has been
carried out in Brazil, even in our particular field of interest. While clinical
neuroscientists may have a reasonable knowledge of the scientific production of their
fellow clinicians, they are frequently unaware of the contributions by basic
neuroscientists; and vice-versa. The main reason for this may lie in the lack of
adequate dissemination of our scientific output. Even papers that have been published in
journals with high impact factor in each specific area rarely break the virtual barrier
that exists between different areas of the same field. This phenomenon almost certainly
occurs in other developing countries, and to justify it by assuming that researchers
only know their specific area does not fully explain the issue, since everyone knows the
eminent international basic and clinical researchers as well as the papers they publish
in their fields of expertise. In this case, the virtual barrier is probably broken by
the very high impact factor of the journals and through astute use of the increased
opportunity for diffusion that the authors and their colleagues have open to them.This second issue of Dementia & Neuropsychologia, besides reviews and
original manuscripts on clinical research, also contains papers from basic research,
making clear that the scientific community recognizes the importance of this
propagation, not only toward due acknowledgment in their own country, which is doubtless
important, but primarily because it is necessary in establishing and multiplying
cooperative studies. The link between basic and clinical researchers is also one of the
key objectives of the organizers of the forthcoming Meeting of Researchers on Alzheimer
Disease and Related Disorders, to be held in Ouro Preto, December 6 to 8, 2007, which
hopefully will represent a milestone in our scientific production in this field.Dementia & Neuropsychologia has been receiving original manuscripts from
many Brazilian centers, demonstrating the confidence held in our Editorial Board, and we
wish to acknowledge this essential support and to reciprocate with the diffusion of the
papers, and future indexation of the journal. In order to continue to receive new
original manuscripts it is felt fitting that the editorial principles of Dementia
& Neuropsychologia be made even more transparent. When receiving a
manuscript our reviewers are provide with the framework partially reproduced below:Consider every manuscript as a candidate for publication – As Dementia
& Neuropsychologia is not yet indexed, it is possible that a
reasonable proportion of the submitted papers will not yet be of high
scientific quality before the peer-review process.Manuscripts can be improved by the peer-review process – A good reviewer
should indicate the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, and may
mention how the study could have been designed to reach a firmer conclusion,
but should also try to give instruction on how to improve the quality of the
manuscript using the available data, or data that are easily accessible by
the author(s). Orientation on re-writing each section of the manuscript may
be included. Guidance on rearranging the statistical analyses is very
important and should be incorporated when required.Stimulate authors to advance in their research careers and to submit further
manuscripts to Dementia & Neuropsychologia – Irony or
acidic criticisms should be avoided. Reviewers should write “as a
knowledgeable, courteous colleague advising the author(s)”.[1] This is particularly
important for countries, or for areas of study, where there is no solid
scientific tradition.Avoid vague proclamations; cite the appropriate papers – For example, if
there are other papers that deserve citation in the text, the reviewer
should cite them. If the manuscript is not novel, the work that it
replicates should be cited.[1]Every part of the manuscript, from title to conclusion(s) may warrant and
receive attention – The title, abstract and conclusions of a manuscript are
extremely important. A good title constitutes the smallest number of words
that adequately defines the content of a paper.[2] As is often said, few people will read the
whole paper, but many will read the title, and if they eventually reach the
abstract, they will go on to the conclusions. The conclusion(s) should be
clearly supported by the data.Comment on spelling and grammar only if they compromise the scientific
accuracy of the manuscript – A final review of the use of the English
language will be available for every accepted manuscript.Finally, one of the main roles of this journal is to bring to light papers of
high scientific quality that are not well known either because they have
been published in Portuguese, Spanish or other languages, or because they
focus on Third World populations. The reviewers should urge the authors to
cite such papers, when appropriate.