Original
Fate of rejected manuscripts in the journal Medicina Intensiva during 2015–2017 periodDestino de los artículos rechazados en Medicina Intensiva en el período 2015–2017

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medine.2021.04.007Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To know the fate of the rejected manuscripts in Medicina Intensiva journal (MI) from 2015 to 2017 with surveillance until 2019.

Design

Retrospective observational study.

Setting

Biomedical journals publication.

Participants

Rejected manuscripts in MI journal.

Interventions

None.

Main variables of interest

Time of publication, impact factor (IF), generated citations and variables associated to publication.

Results

The 69% (420) of analyzed articles (344 originals and 263 scientific letters) were rejected, and 205 (48.8%) were subsequently published, with 180 citations of 66 articles. Journal IF was lower in 173 (84.4%) articles. The number of FI-valid citations was higher than the FI of MI in 21 articles. Origin of manuscript OR 2,11 (IC 95% 1.29–3.46), female author OR 1.58 (IC 95% 1.03–2.44), english language OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1.41–4.0) and reviewed papers OR 1.71 (IC 95% 1.10–2.66) were associated to publication in PubMed database.

Conclusions

The rejected articles in MI have a mean publication rate in other journals. Most of these articles are published in journals with less IF and fewer citations than the IF of MI.

Resumen

Objetivo

Conocer el destino de los trabajos rechazados en Medicina Intensiva (MI) en el período del 2015 al 2017 con seguimiento hasta el 2019.

Diseño

Estudio retrospectivo observacional.

Ámbito

Publicaciones en revistas biomédicas.

Participantes

Manuscritos rechazados en la revista Medicina Intensiva.

Intervenciones

Ninguna.

Variables de interés

Tiempo de publicación, factor de impacto (FI), citas generadas y variables asociadas con a la publicación.

Resultados

De 344 originales y 263 cartas científicas, se rechazaron 420 (69,2%). Se publicaron después 205 (48,8%) y 66 de ellos generaron 180 citas. El FI de las revistas fue menor en 173 casos (84,4%). En 21, el número de citas válidas para FI fue mayor que el FI de MI. El origen del manuscrito odds ratio (OR) 2,11 (IC 95% 1,29 a 3,46), la mujer como autora OR 1,58 (IC 95% 1,03 a 2,44), que estuviera en lengua inglesa OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1,41 a 4,0) y que el artículo hubiera pasado a revisores OR 1,71 (IC 95% 1,10 a 2,66) se asociaron con mayor tasa de publicación en revistas indexadas en PubMed.

Conclusiones

Los artículos rechazados en MI tienen una tasa media de publicación en otras revistas, principalmente con menos FI y generando menor número de citas que el FI de MI.

Introduction

Peer review is the standard used by scientific journals to select articles for publication. However, there is no procedure to ensure that certain papers of sufficient quality are not rejected, or that some studies with methodological deficiencies are not accepted.1

High impact factor (IF) journals reject many of the originals they receive. This is due both to the quality demands of the editorial committees and to the need to present a limited number of papers in order to keep the IF high, since this is associated to the prestige of the journal.2

This rejection rate in turn gives rise to a wave of submissions to other journals, usually of lower IF, which again review the article using the same system. This phenomenon has been evaluated in many previous studies.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 In this evaluation circuit, the original text may gain quality thanks to the recommendations of the editorial teams and reviewers,17 or alternatively the text may become obsolete upon being rejected on several occasions. A high publication rate following a rejection may indicate either low quality of the review process or the need to limit the publications in the original journal in order to maintain its IF.3 A low publication rate after rejection may reflect the poor quality of the submitted originals, indicating limited interest on the part of the original journal.

Another issue is referred to the IF of the journals that posteriorly publish the rejected originals. It is to be expected that authors who see their paper being rejected will seek to publish it in journals with a lower IF.3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17 This is not always the case, however, and the IF of the alternative journal may actually be higher than that of the original journal, thus indicating inadequate assessment of the quality of the document by the latter.

The citations that arise from secondary publications are also indicators of the quality of the editorial process, though they often appear in journals belonging to other categories.20 The non-detection of articles that generate many citations could affect the IF of a journal as a loss of opportunity, and should be regarded by the editorial team as a sentinel event of the process if publication is made in a journal of the same category.

The aim of the present study was to analyze the publication in other journals and the generation of citations of articles rejected by the editorial board of Medicina Intensiva (MI), investigating the variables associated to such publication.

Section snippets

Material and methods

A retrospective study was made of the originals and scientific letters rejected by the editorial board of MI in the period 2015–2017, and which were published in other scientific journals between 2015–2019. The year 2015 was selected as the starting point, coinciding with the change in editorial team.

Use was made of a database of rejected articles provided by the Publisher Elsevier containing all the documents rejected in the mentioned period and which included the title, authors, submitting

Results

In the period 2015–2017, a total of 360 originals and 278 scientific letters were received for evaluation by the editorial board of MI. Based on the signing authors, a total of 16 originals and 15 letters were removed, thus leaving 344 originals and 263 scientific letters for analysis (Fig. 1). The overall rejection rate was 69.2%, distributed over the three years as follows: 69.1% (2015), 67.4% (2016) and 70.8% (2017) (p = 0.69).

Of the 420 rejected articles, there were more originals (n = 241;

Discussion

The present study shows that the publication rate following editorial rejection by MI is comparable to that of other journals, and that such publication mainly takes place in journals with a lower IF or belonging to categories different from intensive care. Furthermore, the publication rate varies according to the geographical origin of the article, the language in which it is written, and the gender of the author, as well as evaluation by the reviewers.

The overall rejection rate of manuscripts

Conclusions

The articles rejected in MI show a stable subsequent publication rate, similar to that of other journals. Most of these texts are published in journals with a lower IF and with a number of citations below the IF of MI. A European or North American origin, papers in English, a woman as submitting person, and evaluation by reviewers are variables associated to a higher rate of posterior publication in journals indexed in PubMed.

Author contributions

José Luis García Garmendia, data generation and compilation, data analysis, drafting of first manuscript. Federico Gordo Vidal, data generation and compilation, review of the text. Santiago Ramón Leal-Noval, data generation and compilation, review of the text. Rosario Amaya Villar, data generation and compilation, review of the text. Néstor Raimondi, data generation and compilation, review of the text. Ana Ochagavía Calvo, review of the text. José Garnacho Montero, original idea, data

Financial support

This study has received no financial support.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Montserrat Miralles Alemany and Montserrat Valero, of the Publisher Elsevier, for their crucial collaboration in obtaining the information for this article.

References (39)

  • G. Citerio et al.

    Fate of manuscripts rejected by Intensive Care Medicine from 2013 to 2016: a follow-up analysis

    Intensive Care Med.

    (2018)
  • N. Casnici et al.

    Assessing peer review by gauging the fate of rejected manuscripts: the case of the Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation

    Scientometrics.

    (2017)
  • C. Cejas

    Analysis of the revision process by American Journal of Roentgenology Reviewers and Section Editors: metrics of rejected manuscripts and their final disposition

    AJR Am J Roentgenol.

    (2017)
  • A.B. Docherty et al.

    The fate of manuscripts rejected from Anaesthesia

    Anaesthesia.

    (2017)
  • C.H. Earnshaw et al.

    An analysis of the fate of 917 manuscripts rejected from Clinical Otolaryngology

    Clin Otolaryngol.

    (2017)
  • C. Zoccali et al.

    The fate of triaged and rejected manuscripts

    Nephrol Dial Transplant.

    (2015)
  • W.D. Grant et al.

    If at first you don’t succeed: the fate of manuscripts rejected by Academic Emergency Medicine

    Acad Emerg Med.

    (2015)
  • K. Okike et al.

    The fate of manuscripts rejected by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume)

    J Bone Joint Surg Am.

    (2012)
  • P. Dewan et al.

    Fate of articles rejected by Indian Pediatrics

    Indian Pediatr.

    (2010)
  • Cited by (0)

    Please cite this article as: García-Garmendia JL, Gordo-Vidal F, Leal-Noval SR, Amaya-Villar R, Raimondi N, Ochagavía-Calvo A, et al. Destino de los artículos rechazados en Medicina Intensiva en el período 2015–2017. Med Intensiva. 2021;45:271–279.

    View full text