Regarding Journal of Thoracic Disease Vol 12, Supplement 1 (February 2020) (Sepsis: Science and Fiction)-Driving blind: instituting SEP-1 without high quality outcomes data.

I read with interest the recent article by Wang et al. “Driving blind: instituting SEP-1 without high quality outcomes data,” in the Journal of Thoracic Disease Vol 12, Supplement 1, February 2020 (1).

The article, in part, addressed potential conflicts of interest regarding SEP-1, a quality of care performance measure sponsored by the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. I am concerned that this article was not subject to peer-review, having been submitted December 14, 2019 and accepted for publication December 20, 2019. Dr. Paul Marik was guest editor of this supplemental issue of the Journal of Thoracic Diseases. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) states that, “editors who make final decisions about manuscripts should recuse themselves from editorial decisions if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential conflicts related to articles under consideration.” (2). The ICJME makes it clear that conflicts may be due to “…personal relationships or rivalries, academic competition, and intellectual beliefs.” (2). Dr. Marik should have recused himself from reviewing the piece by Wang et al. due to conflicts of interest having published highly critical remarks about SEP-1 (3,4). These intellectual conflicts of interest partly weaken the credibility of the article by Wang et al.

Editor’s note

After several rounds of back and forth discussion by the editorial office, the above-mentioned disagreement has been resolved and a consensus has been reached among the authors of the concerned article titled “Driving blind: instituting SEP-1 without high quality outcomes data,” the Guest Editor and Dr. Sean R. Townsend by publishing an erratum of the concerned article based on the matter of fact.

Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD) endorses the following core values to advance its vision and mission: Integrity, Innovation, Internationalism, Credibility, Professionalism, Service. We seek to ensure that everyone within the editorial process feels valued: guest editors, reviewers, the authors, and of course, we value the readers’ feedback.

We strive to keep JTD in conformity with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and the ICMJE’s Recommendations. We appreciate the efforts from authors, guest editors, readers to maintain the high quality of JTD, and together we aim to make the editorial process a positive publishing experience.

The article’s supplementary files as