Catherine M Ketcham

The impact of review articles

The expansion of the scientific literature has produced a concomitant increase in the number of review articles. One may posit that the sheer number of review articles belies their function. This study examines the growth of the review literature, what types of journals publish these papers, and provides data on the citation rate of the review literature. Focus is given to the pathology literature, defined as papers that have the word ‘pathology’ or its derivatives in the title, abstract or as a key word. The pathology literature is proliferating at a rapid rate; from 1991 to 2006, the total number of original articles increased 2.3-fold, while the number of reviews increased 5.6-fold. Furthermore, in that same time frame, approximately 90% of pathology articles and reviews were not published in pathology journals. An examination of the 538 review articles that were published in pathology journals in 2005 reveals that only 21% of them have been cited more than 10 times since their publication. The impact factors of 12 pathology journals were compared with and without review articles for the period 2000–2006, including The American Journal of Pathology (AJP), The Journal of Pathology (JP) and Laboratory Investigation (LI). Inclusion of reviews increased the impact factor for JP by 0.610±0.153 U (±s.d.), which was significantly greater than that for AJP (0.109±0.086) and LI (0.147±0.088). However, for all three journals the total impact factor was largely a reflection of the citations of original articles. The motivations of authors and editors who produce review articles are considered, such as career progress and increasing journal visibility, respectively. The fact that many review articles are poorly cited raises concern about the harm that poor review articles can cause, first by making it more difficult to find the good reviews, and in the worst case by propagating scientific error through lack of critical appraisal of original research. The attributes of the best reviews that serve to shape the future of science are described. These data are presented with the hope that authors and editors will carefully consider their respective roles in ensuring that the body of review literature will be of maximum benefit to the scientific and biomedical community.

p37 Induces tumor invasiveness.

Previous studies have shown a statistically significant correlation between human carcinomas and monoclonal antibody detection of a Mycoplasma hyorhinis–encoded protein known as p37. A potential mechanism of p37 is that it might promote invasion and metastasis. Recombinant p37 enhanced the invasiveness of two prostate carcinoma and two melanoma cell lines in a dose-dependent manner in vitro, but did not have a significant effect on tumor cell growth. Furthermore, the increased binding to cell surfaces and the enhanced invasive potential of cancer cells from exposure to p37 could be completely reversed by preincubation of the cancer cells with an anti-p37 monoclonal antibody. Sequence comparisons, followed by three-dimensional molecular modeling, revealed a region of similarity between p37 and influenza hemagglutinin A, a sialic acid–binding protein that plays a critical role in viral entry. Binding of p37 to prostate carcinoma cells was found to be at least partially sialic acid dependent because neuraminidase treatment decreased this binding. Taken together, these observations suggest that M. hyorhinis can infect humans and may facilitate tumor invasiveness via p37. These results further suggest that p37 may be a molecular target for cancer therapy.

Uteroferrin contains complex and high mannose-type oligosaccharides when synthesized in vitro

Mature uteroferrin (Uf; MΓ = 35,500) is a progesterone-induced acid phosphatase secreted by the pig uterus. It contains a single, unphosphorylated, high mannose-type oligosaccharide. Endometrial explants cultured in vitro secrete Uf with a MΓ of 37,000 (37k Uf) having phosphorylated high mannose oligosaccharides. In this report we demonstrate that 37k Uf contains two N-linked oligosaccharides which are a mixture of complex and high mannose-type oligosaccharides. The complex-type glycopeptides are biantennary and a portion may be fucosylated on the GlcNac of the chitobiose core proximal to the peptide. Only a portion of the high mannose-type oligosaccharides are phosphorylated. The remainder appear to be typical Man6-4GlcNac2 oligosaccharides found on mature Uf.

Predicting impact factor one year in advance.

The first impact factor (IF) to reflect the sole efforts of a new editorial team occurs 4 years into what is usually a 5-year editorship, owing to the lag times of: paper accrual and publication, accumulation of citations in derivative literature, and compiling of such citations by the Thomson ISI Web of KnowledgeSM service. Through weekly collection of citation data from the Web of Science® over the past 2 years, we now demonstrate that the evolution of IF can be tracked weekly over the course of a calendar year, enabling prediction of the next years IF beginning at the middle of the previous year. The methodology used to track the developing IF for Lab Invest is presented in this study and a prediction made for the 2006 IF, along with IF predictions for other general pathology journals (American Journal of Pathology, Journal of Pathology, Modern Pathology, American Journal of Surgical Pathology, and Human Pathology). Despite the fact that the 2006 IF for Lab Invest will not be issued until June 2007, it became apparent as early as July 2006 that the Lab Invest IF would be greatly improved over 2004 and 2005 by a predicted 0.5 units. However, as important as IF can be to a journal, it is vital not to let IF considerations influence every aspect of the editors’ decisions. Rather, the significance of early prediction lies in earlier validation of editorial policies for journal management as a whole, and reassurance that the philosophy for journal operations is on track.

Localization of the human type 5, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase gene by in situ hybridization.

We report the localization of the gene for the human type 5, tartrate-resistant, iron-containing acid phosphatase isoenzyme (HGM designation ACP5) to chromosome 15 (15q22-q26) using the technique of in situ hybridization to metaphase chromosomes. We have localized this gene using peripheral blood chromosomes obtained from both a normal male and an individual carrying an unbalanced translocation involving chromosome 15 [45,XY,-15,-18,+der(18)-t(15;18)(q13;p11)]. In addition, we have demonstrated the utility of employing a standard fluorescent staining technique (distamycin/DAPI) to an emulsion-coated, Wright-stained, and destained chromosome preparation.

Can impact factor data be trusted

J ournal impact factors have a crucial role, either positive or negative, in establishing the status of a journal and the perceived importance of papers that these journals publish. Two recent editorials call into question the integrity of the data used by the Thomson Corporation to calculate impact factors. The author’s concerns include the lack of verification of the primary data, apparent inconsistencies between official impact factors and the posted citation data, errors in the calculations of the total numbers of papers in journals and the categories in which they are placed, and Thomson0s customer service. We are not able to offer any insight into verification of the data collection; however, we do wish to comment on the other issues. First, we have used the Web of Science on the ISI Web of Knowledge site to verify the impact factor of our own journal, Lab Invest, and have found the citation data to be accurate. Second, the article count used for the calculation of the Lab Invest 2006 impact factor is correct. It was not correct in 2004, but was subsequently adjusted by Thomson at our request. Third, our experiences with the support staff at Thomson have always been satisfactory. In this report, we rigorously address the issue of consistency between the published impact factors and the raw citation data presented on the Thomson web site, and unlike Rosser et al, we describe here the way our searches were performed and also show our data. Impact factors and the summaries of the data used in their calculations are presented in the Journal Citation Reports section of the Thomson Web of Knowledge site. To verify the 2006 impact factor for a journal, one needs to confirm both the numerator (2006 citations to papers published in the journal in 2004 and 2005) and the denominator (the sum of eligible papers published in 2004 and 2005). The numerator can be calculated by careful examination of data from Cited Reference Searches on the Web of Science section of the Thomson web site. The denominator can be checked by performing a General Search on the same data, sorting the results by document type, comparing it to the journal’s table of contents, and familiarizing oneself with the journal’s content so as to verify classification of articles. Table 1 shows the results of a crosscheck of the numerators (numbers of citations) for the 2006 impact factors of six journals. For five out of six journals analyzed, the apparent impact factors calculated from the Cited Reference Search are within 0.8% of the official values presented in the Journal Citation Reports. For the sixth journal, Thomson has been notified of the discrepancy and is conducting an investigation. It is also possible to use the data on the Web of Science to calculate modified impact factors for journals of interest, such as impact factors excluding journal self-citations or review articles, both of which are helpful in journal evaluation. Because we found the data on the Web of Science to be reliable for the retrospective calculation of impact factors, we hypothesized that it could also be used for prediction of upcoming impact factors. Before the 2006 impact factors were released, we published predicted 2006 impact factors for six Pathology journals, based on the rate of accrual of citation data in real time. We are now able to report that the accuracy of these predictions was greater than 95% in 5 out of 6 cases (Table 2). These data are further evidence of the internal consistency, transparency and usefulness of the Web of Science data: We therefore conclude that subscribers can use the Thomson ISI Web of Knowledge site with reasonable confidence. We concur that there are mechanisms by which journals, rightly or wrongly, can tilt calculated impact factors in their favor. However, blanket indictment of the data available for computation of impact factors seems to be inappropriate. The opinions presented in this editorial are solely those of the authors and do not represent the Editorial Board of Laboratory Investigation, The United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, or Nature Publishing Group. Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA Correspondence should be addressed to: ketcham@pathology. ufl.edu Laboratory Investigation (2008) 88, 340–341 & 2008 USCAP, Inc All rights reserved 0023-6837/08

The proper use of citation data in journal management

30.00

The publishing game: reflections of an editorial team

Journal impact factors (IF) are often maligned in editorials found in scientific publications, yet citation data can be used appropriately in journal management. The editors of Laboratory Investigation have found that weekly tracking of citation data for this and other highly ranked pathology journals provides valuable feedback on editorial performance and enables us to predict accurate IFs at least six months in advance. Once the IFs are released, it is useful to quantify the contributions of specific article categories, such as reviews and research articles, to the official IFs. In an ongoing attempt to understand the relationship between article downloads and eventual citations, we also analyze the citation rate of papers that had previously been the most frequently accessed on our web site. Finally, as a measure of editorial judgment, the papers that contributed no citations to the journal’s IF are examined as are the papers that were rejected by Laboratory Investigation (Lab. Invest.) but subsequently published elsewhere. Thus the editors of Lab. Invest. use citation data in several ways to measure our progress in elevating the quality of the journal and understand the citation dynamics of papers we publish, while remaining true to the journal’s fundamental operating premise: Publish high-quality original work relating to the mechanisms of disease.

Laboratory Investigation web focus on China

The close of a 5-year editorship gives opportunity to reflect on the highs and the lows of an editorship. The goal of such reflection is to assist both authors and reviewers in interacting with a biomedical journal, and to foster interest among individuals contemplating an editorship. Among the highs was the privilege of publishing high-quality original scientific work within the scope of the journal; in this instance mechanistic studies of disease. Although review articles and editorials have their reward, it is the publication of original peer-reviewed work that constitutes the true basis for advancing biomedical science. This is the heart of journal publication. Second, the editorial interaction with submitting authors in bringing their work to publication is itself highly rewarding, and can lead to longer-term collegial working relationships between editors and authors. The anonymous expert reviewers also play a key role in bringing outstanding scientific work to successful publication. Collectively, authors, editors, and reviewers constitute an important ‘community of science’. Third, working together as an editorial team, especially through the weekly ‘journal clubs’ that a regular editorial meeting affords, is commended as a key reward of any editorial group taking on journal management. The lows included sifting through submitted manuscripts in which the rigor of science was not satisfactory, and encountering specific instances of compromised scientific integrity—fortunately rare. In both instances, the editorial commitment is to publish high-quality original science; a necessary corollary is identifying those submissions, through rigorous but fair review, which do not meet journal standards. In the end, editorship is a highly rewarding experience, and very much conducive to sustaining the wonder of science that drew us to this profession.

What editors want in an abstract

The vast growth of China’s publishing output is a reflection of the increasing strength of Chinese science. The editors of Laboratory Investigation (LI) present a collection of papers that showcases research by authors from institutions across China, highlighting the significant contributions of Chinese scientists to the journal.