Quality and Editorial Leadership of Biomedical Research Journals
Author Information
Author(s): Valerie Matarese, Roberta W. Scherer
Primary Institution: UpTo Infotechnologies, Vidor (TV), Italy; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, United States of America
Hypothesis
Is there a relationship between editorial leadership and journal quality in biomedical research journals from Italy and the UK?
Conclusion
Italian journals scored lower in quality and editorial leadership compared to UK journals, and editorial leadership is a predictor of journal quality.
Supporting Evidence
- Italian journals published fewer papers than UK journals (median, 60 vs. 93).
- Italian journals had lower median impact factors (1.2 vs. 2.7).
- Only 15%–43% of UK journals adhered to key ethical guidelines compared to none of the Italian journals.
- Editorial leadership explained 37.1%–49.9% of the variance in journal quality.
- UK journals had a higher percentage of international authorship compared to Italian journals.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well journals from Italy and the UK guide authors on writing and publishing research. It found that UK journals generally do a better job than Italian ones.
Methodology
The study compared 76 Italian and 76 UK biomedical journals based on bibliometric parameters and editorial leadership criteria.
Potential Biases
The reliance on publicly available information may not accurately reflect the journals' editorial practices.
Limitations
The study's observational design cannot establish causation, and it only evaluated leadership through written policies without assessing actual editorial practices.
Participant Demographics
76 Italian journals and 76 UK journals were included in the study.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.0001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website