Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience

Thomas Bein; Alessia Vargiolu; Giuseppe Citerio; Samir Jaber; Miet Schetz; Anders Aneman; Yaseen Arabi; Katherine Brown; Alain Combes; Michael Darmon; Audrey Jong; Sharon Einav; Niall Ferguson; Morten Hylander Møller; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Paul Mayo; Geert Meyfroidt; Garyphallia Poulakou; Otavio Ranzani; Claudio Sandroni; Manu Shankar-Hari

doi:10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience

Thomas Bein, Alessia Vargiolu, Giuseppe Citerio, Samir Jaber, Miet Schetz, Anders Aneman, Yaseen Arabi, Katherine Brown, Alain Combes, Michael Darmon, Audrey Jong, Sharon Einav, Niall Ferguson, Morten Hylander Møller, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Paul Mayo, Geert Meyfroidt, Garyphallia Poulakou, Otavio Ranzani, Claudio SandroniManu Shankar-Hari

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

Abstract

We analyzed the manuscript submissions to ICM and the responses of the invited reviewers from January to April 2020, and compared the findings of peer-review activity with the same time span in 2019. From January 1st to April 30th 2020, there was a considerable increase in submissions (1201 total submissions, 617 of which were COVID-related) over the comparable time in 2019 (554 total submissions). In both cases, the average percentage of advanced rejections was around 60.In 2019, 180 manuscripts were sent to 1.271 reviewers. In the comparable period of 2020, 296 manuscripts were sent out to 1.741 reviewers. Despite the rapid and massive increase in workload for intensive care health professionals due to the ‘Corona crisis’ our findings suggest that, overall, the peer-review activity in high-quality intensive care journals has not suffered a crisis and does guarantee the continuity of one of the columns of quality in science.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1918-1920
Number of pages	3
Journal	Intensive Care Medicine
Volume	46
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y
Publication status	Published - 2020

Keywords

Betacoronavirus
COVID-19
Coronavirus Infections
Pandemics
Peer Review
Pneumonia, Viral
SARS-CoV-2

Access to Document

10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

Cite this

Bein, T., Vargiolu, A., Citerio, G., Jaber, S., Schetz, M., Aneman, A., Arabi, Y., Brown, K., Combes, A., Darmon, M., Jong, A., Einav, S., Ferguson, N., Møller, M. H., Martin-Loeches, I., Mayo, P., Meyfroidt, G., Poulakou, G., Ranzani, O., ... Shankar-Hari, M. (2020). Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience. Intensive Care Medicine, 46, 1918-1920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

@article{a42fe250f0e047cf944e9f55bb27300d,

title = "Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience",

abstract = "We analyzed the manuscript submissions to ICM and the responses of the invited reviewers from January to April 2020, and compared the findings of peer-review activity with the same time span in 2019. From January 1st to April 30th 2020, there was a considerable increase in submissions (1201 total submissions, 617 of which were COVID-related) over the comparable time in 2019 (554 total submissions). In both cases, the average percentage of advanced rejections was around 60.In 2019, 180 manuscripts were sent to 1.271 reviewers. In the comparable period of 2020, 296 manuscripts were sent out to 1.741 reviewers. Despite the rapid and massive increase in workload for intensive care health professionals due to the {\textquoteleft}Corona crisis{\textquoteright} our findings suggest that, overall, the peer-review activity in high-quality intensive care journals has not suffered a crisis and does guarantee the continuity of one of the columns of quality in science.",

keywords = "Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, Coronavirus Infections, Pandemics, Peer Review, Pneumonia, Viral, SARS-CoV-2, Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, Coronavirus Infections, Pandemics, Peer Review, Pneumonia, Viral, SARS-CoV-2",

author = "Thomas Bein and Alessia Vargiolu and Giuseppe Citerio and Samir Jaber and Miet Schetz and Anders Aneman and Yaseen Arabi and Katherine Brown and Alain Combes and Michael Darmon and Audrey Jong and Sharon Einav and Niall Ferguson and M{\o}ller, {Morten Hylander} and Ignacio Martin-Loeches and Paul Mayo and Geert Meyfroidt and Garyphallia Poulakou and Otavio Ranzani and Claudio Sandroni and Manu Shankar-Hari",

year = "2020",

doi = "10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y",

language = "English",

volume = "46",

pages = "1918--1920",

journal = "Intensive Care Medicine",

issn = "0342-4642",

publisher = "Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer.",

}

Bein, T, Vargiolu, A, Citerio, G, Jaber, S, Schetz, M, Aneman, A, Arabi, Y, Brown, K, Combes, A, Darmon, M, Jong, A, Einav, S, Ferguson, N, Møller, MH, Martin-Loeches, I, Mayo, P, Meyfroidt, G, Poulakou, G, Ranzani, O, Sandroni, C & Shankar-Hari, M 2020, 'Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience', Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 46, pp. 1918-1920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience

AU - Bein, Thomas

AU - Vargiolu, Alessia

AU - Citerio, Giuseppe

AU - Jaber, Samir

AU - Schetz, Miet

AU - Aneman, Anders

AU - Arabi, Yaseen

AU - Brown, Katherine

AU - Combes, Alain

AU - Darmon, Michael

AU - Jong, Audrey

AU - Einav, Sharon

AU - Ferguson, Niall

AU - Møller, Morten Hylander

AU - Martin-Loeches, Ignacio

AU - Mayo, Paul

AU - Meyfroidt, Geert

AU - Poulakou, Garyphallia

AU - Ranzani, Otavio

AU - Sandroni, Claudio

AU - Shankar-Hari, Manu

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - We analyzed the manuscript submissions to ICM and the responses of the invited reviewers from January to April 2020, and compared the findings of peer-review activity with the same time span in 2019. From January 1st to April 30th 2020, there was a considerable increase in submissions (1201 total submissions, 617 of which were COVID-related) over the comparable time in 2019 (554 total submissions). In both cases, the average percentage of advanced rejections was around 60.In 2019, 180 manuscripts were sent to 1.271 reviewers. In the comparable period of 2020, 296 manuscripts were sent out to 1.741 reviewers. Despite the rapid and massive increase in workload for intensive care health professionals due to the ‘Corona crisis’ our findings suggest that, overall, the peer-review activity in high-quality intensive care journals has not suffered a crisis and does guarantee the continuity of one of the columns of quality in science.

AB - We analyzed the manuscript submissions to ICM and the responses of the invited reviewers from January to April 2020, and compared the findings of peer-review activity with the same time span in 2019. From January 1st to April 30th 2020, there was a considerable increase in submissions (1201 total submissions, 617 of which were COVID-related) over the comparable time in 2019 (554 total submissions). In both cases, the average percentage of advanced rejections was around 60.In 2019, 180 manuscripts were sent to 1.271 reviewers. In the comparable period of 2020, 296 manuscripts were sent out to 1.741 reviewers. Despite the rapid and massive increase in workload for intensive care health professionals due to the ‘Corona crisis’ our findings suggest that, overall, the peer-review activity in high-quality intensive care journals has not suffered a crisis and does guarantee the continuity of one of the columns of quality in science.

KW - Betacoronavirus

KW - COVID-19

KW - Coronavirus Infections

KW - Pandemics

KW - Peer Review

KW - Pneumonia, Viral

KW - SARS-CoV-2

KW - Betacoronavirus

KW - COVID-19

KW - Coronavirus Infections

KW - Pandemics

KW - Peer Review

KW - Pneumonia, Viral

KW - SARS-CoV-2

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10807/194350

U2 - 10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

DO - 10.1007/s00134-020-06207-y

M3 - Article

SN - 0342-4642

VL - 46

SP - 1918

EP - 1920

JO - Intensive Care Medicine

JF - Intensive Care Medicine

ER -

Ensuring editorial continuity and quality of science during the COVID-19 storm: the ICM experience

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this