Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is with great enthusiasm that I report important changes to Cancer Research and discuss our plans for the future. The past year has been an exciting one for the editors and we hope for authors and readers as well.In January 2003, we implemented a Senior Editor system. Eighteen distinguished experts have been appointed as Senior Editors, and each has evaluated manuscripts submitted and made decisions based on their own assessment as well as on the opinions of Associate Editors and peer reviewers. This system has been critical in streamlining the review process, especially at the assignment and decision-making stages.Of course, we will continue to rely on our board of Associate Editors to review manuscripts and to assist in identifying the appropriate reviewers, but it is clear that empowering Senior Editors to serve as decision-makers has expedited the review process.Also in January 2003, Cancer Research launched the Rapid Review system, which enables authors to submit their manuscripts via the Internet and enables editors and reviewers to conduct peer review of manuscripts online. I am pleased to announce that the Rapid Review system, as well as the efforts of the journal’s Senior Editors, Associate Editors, reviewers, and the AACR staff, reduced the average turnaround time for reaching a decision on papers by 31% in 2003 (from 62 days to 43 days). Although there is still much work to be done to meet our goal of providing authors with a decision in an average of under 30 days, I am confident that we will be able to meet this goal.Total submissions to Cancer Research increased by 8% in 2003, and we are projecting that we will receive over 4,000 submissions in 2004. I believe this significant increase in submissions reflects a desire by the cancer research community to publish their work in the cancer community’s most vital publication, and I am honored that authors are choosing Cancer Research as a potential outlet for their work. However, as a result of this dramatic increase in submissions, and to ensure that the journal publishes only those studies of the highest impact, we must tighten the journal’s acceptance criteria and accept only the top 20% of Research Article submissions and only the top 10% of Advances in Brief submissions. These guidelines mean that studies that have scientific merit but are judged to be of lower priority for publication in comparison with other submitted studies cannot be accepted.I am pleased to announce that a new feature was added to the journal in March 2004. At the beginning of each issue, a new section, Highlights, contains brief summaries of articles judged by the Editors to be of the highest priority. These summaries allow journal readers to find out quickly why studies are important, how they were carried out, and their relevance within the context of cancer science. We will be offering these highlighted articles online for anyone to see for two weeks after the publication of each issue. We expect that this increased access to selected articles will increase readership for all of the articles in the journal.In this issue you will find an abridged version of our new Information for Authors. An expanded version is also available online at http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/misc/ifora.shtml. The Information for Authors has been rewritten in a concise, reader-friendly fashion and provides potential authors and other interested parties with submission instructions, new guidelines on article length, acceptance criteria, editorial policies, and links to many other useful resources. I strongly suggest that authors who are considering submitting a manuscript to Cancer Research review this important document before submitting their work. Please note that we now request that certain types of supplementary information be deposited in public databases.The updated Information for Authors summarizes modifications to the editorial style of Cancer Research, two of which are of particular interest. The first change is a limitation of the use of abbreviations in journal articles to those abbreviations that are generally accepted by the scientific community. This change was made in recognition of the journal’s growing number of readers whose first language is not English and the need to eliminate an alphabet soup of confusing abbreviations. The second enhancement of journal style is a revision of the journal’s reference formats to follow those of the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, which includes use of Medline abbreviations.We will continue to enhance the experience of our authors and readers during the coming year. First and foremost, we are committed to reducing review time further while maintaining the highest level of scientific rigor and fairness in the process. This will be accomplished by refinements of our online process, optimal utilization of the Senior Editor system, and enhancing the team of Associate Editors to reflect a wider range of expertise. We also plan to appoint a team of Editors dedicated to the important task of soliciting Reviews on timely topics of interest to the broad readership of the journal. We are currently recruiting a full-time Assistant Editor who will help develop content, including expanding Meeting Reports, Editorials and Commentaries, and other special articles. Further, we will improve the appearance of Cancer Research with a complete redesign of the journal’s pages to accommodate the new features and to increase readability.In summary, we are continually transforming Cancer Research to enhance its status as the premier forum for cutting-edge cancer research. Such transformations would not be possible without the tireless efforts of many people, and I am indebted to all of them for their diligence and dedication to the journal. These individuals include the Senior Editors, Associate Editors, reviewers, and the remarkable staff at the AACR Publications office. I would also like to thank the AACR Board of Directors, Dr. Margaret Foti, and the AACR Publications Committee for supporting the changes in the journal as we move forward.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.069 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".