This Article  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, MBA; Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD, MPH

JAMA. 2009;301(8):870.

In this issue of JAMA, we are pleased to publish the names of the peer reviewers who completed manuscript reviews for JAMA in 2008.¹ These reviewers represent nearly every medical specialty and subspecialty, virtually every area of medical research expertise, and reside in more than 40 countries. We extend our appreciation to these peer review consultants for their insightful and rigorous critiques, their thoughtful and scholarly recommendations, and their valuable contributions in helping to maintain and enhance the scientific quality of articles published in JAMA.

We also express our sincere thanks to all authors who submitted research papers, review articles, commentaries, and other manuscripts for consideration for publication in JAMA. These authors have submitted papers that address virtually every area of medicine, including reports that range from cutting-edge research investigations to major practice-changing clinical trials to practical review articles, as well as insightful and provocative commentaries. These authors represent more than 70 countries, and international authors account for 38% of manuscripts submitted. We are grateful to these physician-scientists, medical researchers, clinical investigators, and all other authors who submitted manuscripts for entrusting  JAMA with the opportunity to consider their work for publication.

The high quality of manuscripts submitted to JAMA as well as the rigorous nature and timeliness of the peer review process are directly reflected in several key measures (Table), including our acceptance rate, high impact factor, and continued reductions in editorial turnaround times, particularly the relatively short time from manuscript receipt to publication, now at a median of 95 days. In addition, the number of randomized clinical trial submissions has continued to increase.²

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Table. JAMA Peer Reviewers, Manuscript Data, and Impact Factor, 2002-2008

We appreciate the important contributions of all JAMA peer reviewers and authors. We look forward to the continued support of the peer reviewers in helping to ensure the scientific quality and integrity of articles published in JAMA, and we invite and encourage authors to consider JAMA as their journal of first choice for publication of their important papers.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Editorials represent the opinions of the authors and JAMA and not those of the American Medical Association.

Author Affiliations: Dr Fontanarosa (phil.fontanarosa{at}jama-archives.org) is Executive Deputy Editor and Dr DeAngelis is Editor in Chief, JAMA.

REFERENCES
1. JAMA peer reviewers in 2008. JAMA. 2009;301(8):871-883. FREE FULL TEXT 2. Fontanarosa PB, DeAngelis CD. Publication of clinical trials in JAMA. JAMA. 2008;299(1):95-96. FREE FULL TEXT

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

JAMA Peer Reviewers in 2008
JAMA. 2009;301(8):871-883.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT