Search

In JGR‐Planets, the peer review process is critical to ensuring that the published articles are based on sound scientific principles, follow state‐of‐the‐art techniques while acknowledging relevant prior results, and present exciting discoveries or novel understanding of the fundamental processes that affect solar system objects. JGR‐Planets covers a broad range of topics addressing every aspect of geoscience with the only requirement that the work addresses planetary processes. The wide breadth of topics published is reflected by our editorial team composed in 2023 of associate editors Adrian Brown, Jun Cui, Joel Davis, Leigh Fletcher, Matthias Grott, Ananya Mallik, Germán Martínez, Molly McCanta, Katarina Miljkovic, Naomi Murdoch, Ryan Park, Arianna Piccialli, Andrew Poppe, Beatrix Sánchez‐Cano, Laura Schaefer, Mariek Schmidt, Yasuhito Sekine, Kelsi Singer, Michael Sori, Norihiko Sugimoto, Sonia Tikoo, David Trang, and Zhiyong Xiao in addition to the editors who authored this note. We rely on the expertise of the community to vet the articles submitted to the journal. In 2023, JGR‐Planets benefited from 1,184 reviews provided by 731 unique volunteer referees. We also received help from 19 guest editors working on four active special collections. To these volunteers: We are truly grateful that you chose to dedicate your time and energy to evaluate manuscripts and to advise us on the suitability of each manuscript for JGR‐Planets, often suggesting ways to improve the papers. We know that all our volunteers juggle many duties, both professional and personal. On behalf of the entire editorial board of JGR‐Planets, we express our heartfelt gratitude to the many scientists who support this journal. Thank you! You are performing a valued service to this journal and to the community. Plain Language Summary: The peer review process is the key to ensuring that the articles published in JGR‐Planets are carefully vetted and present thoroughly considered, exciting discoveries or novel understandings of the fundamental processes that affect solar system objects. In 2023, JGR‐Planets benefitted from 1,184 reviews provided by 731 unique reviewers and from the help of 19 guest editors working on four active special collections. We are grateful that so many scientists chose to dedicate their time and energy to evaluating and suggesting ways to improve each submitted manuscript. We also wish to acknowledge our outstanding corps of 23 volunteer associate editors. Scientific publishing is truly a community effort. The entire editorial board of JGR‐Planets wishes to express our heartfelt gratitude to the many scientists who support this journal. Thank you! Key Points: 731 referees provided 1,184 peer reviews of manuscripts in 2023The JGR‐Planets Editorial Board includes 23 volunteer associate editors who provide a crucial serviceThe peer review process is critical to the integrity of JGR‐Planets; the Editorial Board is appreciative of the efforts of these individuals [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diversity is widely recognized as a driver of excellence and innovation. In recent years, women have become an increasingly significant part of the rheumatology workforce. We aimed to assess the gender representation of the leading rheumatology journals' editors and to explore whether editors' gender correlates with the gender of the first and last authors of published articles. We conducted a cross-sectional study and extracted editorial members of rheumatology journals in quartiles 1 to 3 (Clarivate Analytics) from each journal's website. We categorized editorial positions according to the level of influence in manuscript acceptance decision-making (levels I to III). The gender of editors and of the first and last authors in all 2019 original articles published in a sample of 15 rheumatology journals was assigned using a combination of digital gallery and manual searches. There were 2242 editors' names retrieved from 43 journals, 24 (26%) of the 94 editors at level I, 139 (36%) of 385 editors at level II, and 469 (27%) of 1763 at level III were female. The imbalance between journals was heterogeneous. Females were the first authors in 1342 (48%) and the last authors in 969 (35%) of the 2797 published articles. However, we found no significant correlation between editors' and authors' gender. Our data showed uneven gender representation on the editorial boards of most rheumatology journals, but we did not find any apparent vertical segregation or influence on publishing by gender. Our findings suggest that a generational transition may be occurring among authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Family Journal (TFJ) has experienced increases in manuscripts submitted for publication, especially from international scholars and quantitative researchers. This reverses a previous trend to publish more practice-oriented articles for our clinical readership. The journal will take efforts to balance theory, research, and practice. Some manuscripts are rejected for distribution to the editorial board (or "unsubmitted") due to problems conforming to the APA Publication Manual 7th Edition guidelines. Some submissions would benefit from reviews by colleagues and securing the services of an editor. Authors are asked to attend to guidelines concerning levels of headings and formatting of citations and references. Most importantly, authors should follow bias-free language guidelines. There are additional considerations in the desk review process such as including practice implications for Marriage and Family Counselors in the article and incorporating relevant previously published articles from TFJ in the literature review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article titled "Laser Welding of UNS S33207 Hyper-Duplex Stainless Steel to 6061 Aluminum Alloy Using High Entropy Alloy as a Filler Material" has been retracted by the Applied Sciences Editorial Office. Concerns were raised about image overlaps between this article and a previously published article with no common authorship. An investigation confirmed the overlap of figures in both articles, leading to the decision to retract the publication. The retraction was approved by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. Dhanesh G. Mohan agreed to the retraction, while Jacek Tomków and Sasan Sattarpanah Karganroudi did not provide a comment. [Extracted from the article]

The article titled "Envariance as a Symmetry in Quantum Mechanics and Applications to Statistical Mechanics" has been retracted by the Symmetry Editorial Office. Concerns were raised about the article's overlap with previously published studies by different authors. An investigation confirmed that sections 2-5 of the article contained text and equations that were not appropriately acknowledged or cited from the earlier studies. As a result, the article has been retracted in accordance with MDPI's retraction policy and the Committee on Publication Ethics's retraction guidelines. The authors did not provide a comment on this decision. [Extracted from the article]

Purpose: There are concerns in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for scientific manuscripts. This study examines trends in editorial and peer review processes in an ophthalmological journal over the last decade. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of editorial data from the journal Acta Ophthalmologica containing all manuscript submissions between 2010 and 2020. Results: The number of yearly submissions grew between 2010 and 2019 from 1014 to 1623, and in 2020, the number of submissions increased to 2449. In total, the number of submissions increased by 142% between 2010 and 2020. Similarly, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts increased from 48% to 67% during the period 2010–2020. The number of invitations needed to obtain one review showed an increase from 1.9 to 2.6 between 2010 and 2019, but remained stable between 2019 and 2020. However, the number of reviewers per reviewed manuscript, reviewed manuscripts per reviewer and time from invitation to completed review assignment remained almost constant between 2010 and 2020. Researchers based in North American were disproportionally often invited to review (18%) compared to their share of published articles (7%), and they also declined review invitation more frequently compared to scholars in other parts of the world. Conclusions: The study revealed an increase in submitted manuscripts to an ophthalmological journal over the last decade, with a further increase during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The number of reviewer invitations needed to obtain one review grew during the study period but remained constant between 2019 and 2020, despite a vast increase in submitted manuscripts. Hence, the burden for unique reviewers did not increase. Instead, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts grew, and the reviewer pool expanded, which allowed the annual average number of reviews by individual reviewers to remain stable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I want to thank the authors of the articles published in I Drugs in R& i D over the course of 2022. The quality of published articles is also testament to the diligence of the peer reviewers. [Extracted from the article]

B Obesity Surgery b https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06292-6 Due to a clerical error, twenty-one of our esteemed Editorial Board members and three external reviewers were excluded from the published article. Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]