New research journals are needed and can compete with titans
New research journals are needed and can compete with titans
What? Another new journal? Oh please, not that!
This editorial marks the starting point for a new journal, Temperature. This latest addition to the Landes Bioscience collection of research journals will be a multidisciplinary publication focused on the interactions between living matter and temperature. The first question, however, that the reader is likely to have is not about the journal’s thematic boundaries. The first question is likely to be: “Why do we need another journal?” The News section of Science recently published a report about a bogus “research article,” which was intentionally packed with deep flaws and then submitted to many new open-access journals; 150 of them rapidly accepted this “piece of wisdom.”1 At first, you may be surprised that so many journals are willing to publish junk, but your surprise will fade away rather quickly when you recollect how many e-mail messages you deleted today that contained an invitation to publish in a new online journal founded by some fairytale magician in a beautiful land far, far away. Don’t we already have many (perhaps too many) high-quality, well-established research journals run by authoritative academic societies and published by reputable companies? Surely, they can satisfy any publishing need imaginable for every scientist who dares to write something!
And so I thought too—initially. But as I thought more, I realized that not all my publishing needs, however modest they may be, are readily met by the good old journals. This editorial will address one feature that is missing from nearly all large journals, at least for people interested in temperature.
What the good old journals do not offer
Over the past 30 y, the American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology (originally, a section of the American Journal of Physiology) has been one of my favorite journals. Nearly all prominent scientists in the thermoregulation field—Clark Blatteis, Jack Boulant, Michel Cabanac, Barbara Cannon, Keith Cooper, Carl Gisolfi, Bob Hales, Ted Hammel, Peter Hochachka, Tetsuro Hori, Claus Jessen, Kazuyuki Kanosue, Matt Kluger, Jim Krueger, Helen Laburn, Duncan Mitchell, Taketoshi Morimoto, Ethan Nadel, Tetsuo Nagasaka, Teruo Nakayama, Jan Nedergaard, Tim Noakes, Nancy Rothwell, Evelyn Satinoff, Mike Sawka, Eckhart Simon, and many others—published here, at least occasionally. I considered it a privilege to send my manuscript to it (at that time, we did so by snail mail), and in 1993–94, together with Osamu Shido, I published my first two articles in this journal,2,3 both coming from the laboratory of our mentor, Professor Blatteis. Later, I published 30 more pieces in this journal, with various co-authors, and using nearly every publication format available. I served on the Editorial Board of this journal for three terms and, in 2005–2007, I had the honor of working as the Editor for this journal’s Call of Papers on Physiology and Pharmacology of Temperature Regulation. According to Pontus Persson, who was the Editor-in-Chief at that time, this Call was “extremely successful”;4 the review that summarized the Call5 has been cited 247 times (Google Scholar, December 20, 2013). But the most important aspect of my relationship with this journal was that I read it regularly and, starting from the day I took my first independent research position in the United States, subscribed to it. Many issues of that journal contained at least some papers on thermoregulation.
I canceled my subscription a couple of years ago. Over the past years, the way we conduct research and the way we publish research results have both changed drastically. Today, almost no traditional, single-technique thermophysiology laboratories are left. Most scientists use a wide range of methods and techniques, run collaborative multidisciplinary research projects, and change topics of their research frequently—depending on funding. Many belong to multiple scientific societies concurrently, joining and leaving societies as needed—depending on the current track of study. At any point in time, there are a few researchers interested in thermoregulation, but they represent and identify themselves with many different fields: from marine biology to molecular genetics, from nutrition science to neurosurgery, and from parasitology to psychiatry. Furthermore, the turnover rate of this pool of researchers interested in temperature is relatively high. Nowadays, when I glance through the online table of contents of the American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, I rarely see a paper on thermoregulation.
When general population refer to today’s medicine, accuracy plays one of the most significant roles and people’s lives are directly dependent on it. Likewise, any researches pertaining to medicine are required to meet the highest standards. The challenge nowadays is that any conclusions of researches can be published online and used as a reference without being adequately checked and approved. Mikhail (Misha) Blagosklonny of Oncotarget perfectly understood this issue and attempted to generate an alternative solution. That’s how a weekly oncology-focused research journal named “Oncotarget” has been founded back in 2010. The main principle of this journal is based on Altmetric scores that are used as a quality measure. That helps both readers and authors to quality-check publications with Altmetric Article Reports that create “real-time feedback containing data summary related to a particular publication.” Oncotarget website demonstrates a full publications list with respective scores higher than 100 as well as reports discussed above. Mikhail (Misha) Blagosklonny glad to share his new approach and hopes it provides the necessary help to anybody, who has interest in oncology.
Zoya Demidenko
“A diagnostic autoantibody signature for primary cutaneous melanoma” has the Altmetric score of 594. This paper was published back in 2018 by Oncotarget and completed by various experts from Hollywood Private Hospital, Edith Cowan University, Dermatology Specialist Group, St. John of God Hospital and The University of Western Australia. The introduction of the study discusses “recent data shows that Australians are four times more likely to develop a cancer of the skin than any other type of cancer”, and shares an insight on melanoma that “is curable by surgical excision in the majority of cases, if detected at an early stage.”
The article has got an Altmetric score of 594. Mikhail (Misha) Blagosklonny realizes that majority of readers are aiming to comprehend the very meaning of it. Based on the Altmetric website, the score relates to “how many people have been exposed to and engaged with a scholarly output.” Likewise, the paper about melanoma, was used for citations in various news articles 69 times. Moreover, it was quoted in 2 online blogs, as well as 25 Tweets on Twitter and 1 Facebook post. FOX23 of Tulsa, Oklahoma has headlined their report on July 20, 2018 as “New blood test could detect skin cancer early”, using the main content of Australia study
Another Oncotarget’s study with a top score of 476, is “Biomarkers for early diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: Do we need another moon-shot,”. This study has appeared in 60 news stories, 1 online blog post and 6 Twitter posts. The majority of public may have come across a brief overview only, however those who visit Mikhail (Misha) Blagosklonny at Oncotarget, do receive useful scientific facts. Oncotarget is happy to have the chance to share with online customers this highly appreciated and high-quality information, that is trustworthy and reliable.
https://www.crunchbase.com/person/mikhail-blagosklonny#section-overview
Comments
Post a Comment