MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Editors' report, November 2011

2012· article· en· W2915844034 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew A. Somogyi, Lionel D. Lewis, Adam F. Cohen, Albert Ferro, Yoon K. Loke, James M. Ritter

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLibrary scienceFamily medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During 2011 (from 1 January to 31 October) BJCP published: 8 Editors' views, 1 Editors' report, 1 Editors' pick, 1 Editorial, 42 Reviews, 1 Systematic review, 1 Expert Panel report, 100 Main papers, 1 Methods in Clinical Pharmacology, 16 Short reports, 1 Commentary, 15 Book reviews, 2 New Drug Mechanisms, 2 Themed sections, 29 Letters to the Editors and 1 Proceedings/Abstracts. There was one themed issue ‘Haemostasis’. Most of these data are very similar to those in previous years but with an increasing number of invited reviews which we are confident will further enhance the quality of the journal. We received 564 submissions (6% higher compared with 2010), of which 360 (+2%) were original papers and 41 (–7%) were short reports. Of the total submissions, 112 (–1%) have been accepted and 307 (+13%) rejected with the remainder pending a decision or awaiting a revision. Of the total number of original papers submitted, 15% have been accepted, 57% rejected and the 28% remaining are pending a decision or awaiting a revision. For short reports, 20% have been accepted, 58% rejected and the 22% remaining are pending a decision or awaiting a revision. For the full years of 2009 and 2010, we accepted for original papers 39% and 32%, respectively and 41% and 37% short reports. The figures for 2011 so far suggest that acceptance rates will be similar. Original submissions from 1 November 2010 to 31 October 2011 came from 49 countries (47 countries in 2009 and 54 in 2010): United Kingdom (111, 16.5% of total), USA (60, 8.9%), the Netherlands (58, 8.6%), China (49, 7.3%), India (41, 6.1%), France (39, 5.8%), Australia (33, 4.9%), Italy (30, 4.5%), Japan (24, 3.6%), Germany (23, 3.4%), Korea (23, 3.4%), Spain (17, 2.5%), Switzerland (14, 2.1%), Canada (13, 1.9%), Belgium (11, 1.6%), Denmark (11, 1.6%), Sweden (10, 1.5%) and 32 other countries (<10 submissions each). Compared with 2010, Switzerland made it in the list of countries with 10 or more submissions at the expense of Iran and substantial increases were noted from China, the Netherlands, USA, United Kingdom and Korea. Papers were submitted and handled electronically via the ScholarOne website. Median times (2010 figures in brackets) were as follows: from submission to first decision 35 (44) days (range 0–173). from receipt by the referee to return of their report 13 (13) days (range 0–61). from submission to acceptance 86 (115) days (range 0–250). from receipt at Wiley-Blackwell to accepted Article publication 9 (9) days. from receipt at Wiley-Blackwell to print publication 133 (105) days. These results show satisfactory improvements, especially in the categories ‘from submission to first decision’, which has decreased by 9 days (20%) and ‘from receipt by the referee to return of their report’, in which the long tail of up to 61 days has halved compared with 2010. This reflects the outstanding commitment by referees in what is a highly competitive market with increased demands on precious time from more journals and more manuscripts. The impact factor is 3.063, a decline of 6% following 2 years of increases. BJCP is ranked 74th out of 252 journals in Pharmacology and Pharmacy, a slip of eight positions. Out of 8073 journals in the Impact Factor list, the BJCP is ranked 1351th, a decline of 274 positions and slippage into the top 17% compared with top 15% in 2010. We welcome Simon Day, Andrea Malizia, Jan Schellens, David Singh and Andrew Webb to the Executive Editorial Board. Arduino Mangoni, Amin Rostami-Hodjegan, Rafael Schäfers and Mike Schachter have reached the end of their terms and we are extremely grateful for their dedication and the hard work they have done for the journal in this crucial role. (Mike continues to serve on the Reviews Board). We also welcome Fernando de Andres-Trelles, Neil Benowitz, Ingolf Cascorbi, Minne Casteels, David Greenblatt, Geoff Isbister, Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain, Kathie Knights, Hans Ovelgönne, Olavi Pelkonen, Matthias Schwab and Guilherme Suarez-Kurz to the International Editorial Board and thank Leif Bertilsson, Stephen Clarke, Walter Haefeli, Hillel Halkim, Ian Hall, Atholl Johnston, Farhad Kamali, Joan-Ramon Laporte, David Newell, Oscar Simooya, Jim Slattery, Anthony Smith, Terrence Stephenson, Bruno Stricker, Hosnieh Tajerzadeh, Simon Thomas and Giampaolo Velo whose terms have concluded. The editors thank all Board Members including Reviews, Executive and International editors for their continuing support and contributions over the past year. Monthly teleconferences of senior editors have included key persons from Wiley-Blackwell (currently Stephen Montgomery recently appointed Managing Editor and Elizabeth Whelan, Publisher) and the Society (currently Jonathan Brüün, Director of Communications and Business Development); these teleconferences have greatly facilitated communication and streamlined many processes and editorial board decisions including the occasional appeal. During the year Jonathan replaced Hazel O'Mullen at the monthly teleconferences and we thank Hazel for her counsel and wish her well in her new role with the society as Marketing and Communications Manager. Stephen replaced Katie Howard who we also thank (especially for her work with the Reviews board) and wish her well. During 2011 a meeting with our sister journal BJP has taken place to determine a joint strategy regarding papers, given their scope, which could be submitted to both journals and to Review articles and themed issues. The annual meetings of the Executive editors and of the International Editorial Board are scheduled for December 2011. New lines of reporting for both have been agreed, to a Joint publications board (which provides liaison between society and publisher with input from the clinical section and from the vice principal for meetings as well as from BJP), which meets twice a year and reports to the BPS Executive committee. This should alert us to planned BPS activities and related opportunities to commission themed reviews from leading scientists in each field. We thank all the publishing staff at Wiley-Blackwell including Katie Howard, Victoria Renigan (Editorial Assistant), Michael Willis (Editorial Services Manager), Amanda Hunter (Production Editor) and Phil Wright (Marketing) for their unwavering and enthusiastic support, led expertly and overseen with calm efficiency by our publisher, Elizabeth Whelan.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3060.312

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.440
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.105 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207