© 1998 by European Society of Cardiology
Copyright © 1998, European Society of Cardiology
Geographical shifts in submissions
Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
In the January issue of Cardiovascular Research [1]we emphasized the large, recent increase in the number of submissions to the Journal, probably resulting from the increase in impact factor over the last years [1, 2]in combination with the speedy review process [1, 3]. Apart from that there is also a clear trend in the geographical distribution of submissions. In 1997 Cardiovascular Research received most manuscripts from the USA (20%), followed by Japan (14%), the United Kingdom and Germany (both 12%). Fig. 1 shows that these numbers have changed substantially, e.g., for the USA from 33% in 1992 to 20% in 1997. Also, the contribution of the United Kingdom decreased, whereas the opposite is observed for Germany (Fig. 1). These trends seem not related to the mid-1995 changes in ownership, Publisher and Editorial Team of the Journal. Fig. 2 shows the absolute number of submissions. The large increase in submissions in 1997 compared with the preceding years [1]is reflected as an increase for all four countries when 1997 is compared to 1996 (Fig. 2), but the increase for the USA was not enough to maintain its share (Fig. 1).
|
|
Fig. 3 shows the worldwide number of submissions divided on a percentage scale over Europe, North-America, Japan and the rest of the world. The gradual increase and decrease of submissions from Europe and North-America respectively seem not related to the change of the status of the Journal as the official basic science journal of the European Society of Cardiology in 1995, because this trend is obvious from 1992. Finally, Fig. 4 shows the absolute number of worldwide submissions. The decreased number of submissions both in absolute and relative terms is smaller for North-America (Figs. 3 and 4
) than for the USA (Figs. 1 and 2
), reflecting stable numbers for Canada.
|
|
Overall these geographical shifts may point to less scientific output to the cardiovascular field from the USA compared to many other countries. Comparable data from the field of clinical cardiology [4]indicate an increase in output from the USA in the first half of the 1980s, followed by a decrease in the second half. It would be interesting to see whether the more drastic reduction in submission to Cardiovascular Research (Figs. 1 and 2
) is also observed by other journals in the cardiovascular field, amongst which the USA journals, and whether or not this compares to investments in this research area.
 |
Notes |
|---|
1 On behalf of the Editorial Team.
|
References |
|---|
 Top References |
|---|
- Opthof T, on behalf of the Editorial Team of Cardiovascular Research. How to handle an over 25% increase in submissions. Cardiovasc Res 1998;37:1–2.
- Editorial Team. Cardiovascular Research enters top 10 of the cardiovascular category. Cardiovasc Res 1996;32:987.
- Coronel R, on behalf of the Editorial Team of Cardiovascular Research. A year in retrospect. Cardiovasc Res 1996;32:191–193.
- De Jong JW, Schaper W. The international rank order of clinical cardiology. Eur Heart J 1996;17:35–42.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Opthof, R. Coronel, and M. J. Janse Reviewer's recommendations predict impact: why you have to send us your very best work Cardiovasc Res, October 1, 2000; 48(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Opthof, R. Coronel, and M. J. Janse Submissions, editorial process and impact factor 1992-2000: Focus on Europe Cardiovasc Res, August 1, 2000; 47(2): 203 - 206. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||