It is easy to imagine predatory publishers ready to pounce at any moment. They present real threats to professional reputations and obstacles on the long road from research to dissemination. It is also easy to be tempted by solicitations for quick and easy publishing, especially for early career faculty and researchers working in high-pressure environments. With a little investigation, though, you can avoid such publishing scams and find the journal that best aligns with your research topic, intended audience, long-term career goals, and complies with any funder’s public access mandates. But what questions should you ask, and what tools are available to help you evaluate whether an invitation to publish, present at conferences, or serve as a peer reviewer is a legitimate opportunity or a trick intentionally designed to dupe you through false flattery? These rules focus on fraudulent publishing but can also be applied to evaluate suspect conferences.Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which describes predatory publishing as “systematic for-profit publication of purportedly scholarly content  in a deceptive or fraudulent way and without any regard for quality assurance” [Predatory  publishing covers a complex set of unethical business practices, most focused on extracting money from authors and their institutions. Here, we rely on a definition from the surance” . FraudulThink.Check.Submit. [Think. Check. Attend. [For science to be credible, integrity of the research and transparency throughout the research life cycle is required. Fraudulent journals and conferences might include valid scholarship, but their abuse of the scholarly process can undermine trust in researchers’ work. Fortunately, tools to tackle the challenge of questionable invitations such as .Submit.  and Thin Attend.  provide Tread carefully when it comes to unsolicited invitations to submit. How many times a month do you receive an unsolicited email to present at an international conference that covers topics outside of your expertise? Or receive invitations to publish in a journal that you have never heard of? Does the invitation appear professional and legitimate? Do your areas of expertise match the aims and scope of the publication? Is the proposed turnaround time to provide a peer reviewed manuscript reasonable? If you answered “no” to any of these questions, treat them as a yellow flag, warning you to consider whether you are being solicited by a potentially disreputable publisher. Don’t click on provided links that could contain a software virus or lead you to a fraudulent journal website! We recommend you navigate to the journal website directly from your web browser or a reputable database to access the author submission information. Check the URL of the journal and publisher sites carefully, and beware of fake websites that mimic reputable journals.Once at the journal website, look for signs of credibility. Legitimate publishers provide easy access to the table of contents to their publications. Predatory publishers may not actually publish articles at all, or the quality of published work may be poor. Are current and past issues easily accessed? Are the size and frequency of the issues consistent over the life of the publication? Register a warning flag of concern if you cannot locate or access published issues or their table of contents. Read a few articles in the journal to assess the scientific rigor and whether the contents are relevant to the scope and mission of the journal. When in doubt, grab that cup of coffee and spend time reading what’s inside the cover.Directory of Open Access Journals lists thousands of OA journals with zero costs to authors.Be sure you understand exactly what you are paying for. Legitimate journals will make any and all fees transparent prior to article submission. Journals that do not post their fees should be viewed with caution. With a growing shift toward OA publishing models that share research without charge to readers, both nonprofit and commercial publishers are experimenting with ways to keep money coming in. One common solution asks authors to pay publication fees known as article processing charges (APCs). These charges may range from hundreds to thousands of dollars per article. It is important to understand that high APCs do not necessarily correlate with fraudulent practice; some legitimate journals charge US$5,000 or more per article. Journals, including both OA and subscription journals, may also incur page charges or fees for value-added services such as translation. Legitimate journals that charge fees for OA publication typically offer waivers for researchers from low- to middle-income countries or who demonstrate financial need. Additionally, large funding agencies typically allow for dissemination costs in project budgets, such as publication fees, in part to support their mandates for public access to research findings. However, not all OA publications assess author fees; the Publons, Elsevier’s Reviewer Hub, and Peer Community In, where reviews may be published or review quality is publicly scored.Peer review is one of the key components to ensuring professional ethics are applied to the process of assessing quality content. Whether the journal employs anonymous review, open review, or another method, check that the review process is well defined. Does the typical duration of peer review match the expectations of rigor? How are biases and conflicts of interest handled? Reputable journals have policies in place to address alleged research misconduct. Reviewers enjoy behind-the-scenes insight into the quality control process for the journal content and give you another view of who finds this journal worthwhile. Check to see if reviewers are acknowledged on the journal website and whether you recognize any of the reviewers as authorities in the field. Today, support is growing for greater transparency in reviews and recognition of reviewers’ credibility and critical service. A number of tools designed to give credit to the traditionally hidden contributions of reviewers are now available such as Clarivate Analytics’ A reputable journal will proudly identify its editors and editorial board members along with their institutional affiliations. Spot-check a few individuals’ professional websites or CVs to confirm their involvement with the journal and to examine if their expertise aligns with the journal’s scope. Be careful not to make assumptions about a journal’s legitimacy based on factors such as editors’ institutional prestige or geographic location or whether or not you know them personally. Lack of inclusive representation among editors is a persistent problem in scholarly publishing, and increased diversity is another sign of a publisher’s commitment to ethical publishing practices. Can you Redalyc, and Web of Science, carefully vet journals for inclusion based on transparent criteria. A quick title search in the database can determine this, or you can check the journal title list to confirm that the journal in question is currently indexed. Another potentially useful resource for identifying the abstracting and indexing sources that cover the journal is Ulrich’s Global Serials Periodicals Directory, which may be available electronically at your library. While inclusion in a reputable database is a good sign of legitimacy, it is not sufficient confirmation of credibility alone; potentially predatory publications have been found in several reputable databases. A journal’s absence from an index does not necessarily mean it is predatory, but a false claim of inclusion, on the other hand, is a clear red flag.Consider whether the journal is indexed in reputable and appropriate subject databases. Check the journal’s website for any indexing claims and verify that it is covered by the stated sources. Many databases, such as MEDLINE, Engineering Village, SCImago’s Journal & Country Rank) or field normalized metrics . Some of these research analytic tools are freely available, while others require a subscription. Check with your nearest research university’s library for access.Predatory journals don’t shy away from placing fraudulent metrics on their website, like an artificial journal impact factor (JIF). These metrics add an air of legitimacy to their website, but they can also be quick facts you can check to evaluate the publication. For example, if a journal claims a JIF, it must be indexed in the database, Web of Science. If you have access to Web of Science or its companion product, Journal Citation Reports, you can verify the JIF in one of these tools. Wildly popular (and widely criticized ) “contaiInternational Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), or the Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communications (C4DISC)? Predatory publishers engage in unethical business practices with a goal to make money. They make false claims of being a legitimate company and offer promises that are too good to be true.Look for the publisher’s physical address and personal contact. Can the publisher’s address be verified? If you’re dubious, try to confirm the existence of the publisher in a business registry. In the case of a new journal that doesn’t have an established reputation, knowing the publisher can help establish credibility. If the publisher lists multiple journals on their website, browse their portfolio to see whether there are any titles that you know by reputation. While a lack of other journal titles does not signify anything regarding legitimacy of a publisher, seeing titles of journals you know to be reputable is reassuring. Does the publisher demonstrate adherence to professional publishing ethics through membership in the COPE, anonymous group and another anonymous person. Where else in scholarly pursuits would you take advice from someone you can’t even name? Cabells is attempting to legitimize their list with more transparency (and a price tag), but the evaluation process is still hard to complete in a one-stop shop. You could use a list as a starting place: “Hmm… someone flagged this journal as predatory at one time, I’m going to go look a little deeper before I submit a manuscript to them.” When you do use a list, be sure you understand the inclusion criteria for a journal or publisher. The scholarly publishing landscape is changing fast. Lists can be outdated or biased. If you find a journal or publisher on a predatory list, don’t write it off until you do some homework. On the flipside, don’t assume a journal is legitimate if it is not on a list. New predatory journals are cropping up all the time. Expect to devote some time to the process of evaluating where you will submit your work.We are all busy; we get it. There is too much information out there and not enough time in the day. But ignoring warning signs or shortcutting your evaluation of a potential place to publish your research is not a good idea. Don’t rely on a single, anonymous list to decide this for you. For example, the controversial Beall’s List was taken down in 2017  and has Don’t let the pressure to publish override your evaluation of the credibility of the publication. The fear of fraudulent publishing might lead authors to dismiss or ignore requests from journals simply because they are new or unfamiliar. Worse, some authors might openly describe such journals as “predatory” to colleagues without investigating the factors above. This does a disservice to legitimate journals that aren’t affiliated with major publishers or may not have published long enough to qualify for coverage in subject indices. It can also be especially harmful to early career journal editors or to journals facing geographic and other systemic inequities in publishing . It’s haScholarly publishing is undergoing massive changes, accelerated by digital modes of sharing knowledge. The most important rule to avoid predatory publishing scams is to accept that there is a continuum of legitimacy in publishing venues . Set asi


As Bloom et al.  have indAs reported by a paper published in Frontiers in Public Health in 2020 , commentThere are several remaining questions about the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic but one of the most important is to understand how the virus that initiated the epidemic spread in Wuhan City and to identify the missing links between the viruses circulating in bat populations and the human virus. Different theories of accidental release from a lab and zoonotic spillover remain possible  and the This story is only a small piece of a probably much larger puzzle that involves wildlife and laboratories. There is certainly a need to “document the veracity and provenance of data from which analyses are conducted and conclusions drawn so that analyses are reproducible by independent experts” as Bloom's letter indicates .All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.


It is extremely painful not to accept a couple of manuscripts from researchers for further processing almost daily because of increased submissions and our financial as well as human resource constraints. At present we get almost about two hundred fifty submissions not only from Pakistan but from overseas from many countries in South East Asia and Asia-Pacific in particular every month while we have the facilities to process, manage and publish just about three hundred fifty to four hundred manuscripts every year. It leads to annoyance with authors whose papers are not accepted which is a real dilemma for the Editor. Editor colleagues of the other two Impact Factor medical journals published from Pakistan are faced with a similar situation.While on one hand the authorities claim to promote research culture but at the same time the authors find it extremely difficult to get their studies published in good standard peer reviewed biomedical journals in Pakistan as they are too few just three. IF journals in Pakistan is their first preference to meet requirements of the regulatory bodies like Higher Education Commission which says that all PhD scholars and medical university faculty members should publish their work in Impact Factor Journals. Publication in IF journals overseas is very expensive which many authors cannot afford. Hence, the only way forward is to relax the rules and regulations by the regulatory bodies like HEC or include few more good quality medical journals in its list which even do not enjoy an Impact Factor at present but have applied, are included in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) and are hopeful of getting an IF in the coming years.We on our part has time and again made it clear and highlighted the common reasons for not accepting manuscripts for further processing after initial screening and Editor’s Triage.3The situation can improve a lot if medical institutions organize regular training workshops for their faculty members, undergraduate and postgraduate students on Scientific Writing. Secondly each institution must have some facilities whereby the authors are given advice after looking at their manuscripts in pre-submission stage. The Dept. of Medical Education can also be entrusted this responsibility which will not only improve the quality of these manuscripts but also go a long way in reducing the rejection rate. At the same time all the journals editors should also feel it their responsibility to train the authors by facilitating training workshops in collaboration with different medical institutions. In Pakistan, a few distinguished medical editors have been facilitating such workshops all over the country from the platform of Pakistan Association of Medical Editors (PAME) for the last many years but still a lot more needs to be done.In order to know our strength and weaknesses, we started conducting our own publication audit a couple of years ago which is now done annually on regular basis. The last publication audit was done in 2019. Further analysis of submissions showed that the number of manuscripts published after peer review increased from 168 to 241 from Pakistan, from 46 to 66 from China, from 32 to 35 from Saudi Arabia. However, their number decreased from Turkey from 60 to 28, and four from eight from Islamic Republic of Iran. As expected majority of the submissions from within the country were again from major cities i.e. 261 from Karachi, 226 from Lahore, 101 from Islamabad, 62 from Peshawar, 43 from Rawalpindi, 24 from Faisalabad, 29 from Hyderabad including Jamshoro and 12 from Bahawalpur. Despite the fact that we always follow an author friendly policy, do our best to help, encourage and guide them but at times we find ourselves helpless when the authors do not bother to carefully read and follow the instructions for authors on the journal website, papers have numerous deficiencies or the English language and Grammar needs extensive improvement. We certainly cannot help re-write these papers which some of these submissions demand, hence the refusal to process them further.5As a policy we prefer original research in clinical medicine. Manuscripts in certain disciplines like Dentistry, Physical Rehabilitation Medicine and Pharmacy as well as lengthy Reviews, basic sciences, Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis have a low priority with us though we do accommodate a few selected ones provided the topic is interesting. KAP studies, routine Survey reports and animal studies are generally not accepted due to our limitations. We feel that there is a great scope of good quality peer reviewed medical journals covering Basic Sciences, Allied Health Sciences including Nursing, Rehabilitation Medicine and Pharmacy. Let us hope that some people will come forward and fill this gap. In order to build the professional capacity of the editors, PAME in collaboration with University of Health Sciences Lahore has started a Certificate Course in Medical Editing.


Major developments were made recently in both VR  and AR  technologies, which became the focus of attention. In recent years, MR  technology has also emerged, and optical components play an irreplaceable role in these technologies.Light: Science & Applications (LIGHT) have made progress together and have both made their names in the vast field of optoelectronics.Professor Byoungho Lee, who graduated from the University of California at Berkeley and currently works at Seoul National University in South Korea, has been committed to the development of optical components used in VR and AR technologies. As a pioneer of optical electronics in Korea, he is involved in various well-known academic organizations in the optical field, such as the Optica, SPIE, and IEEE, as well as serving as the president of the Optical Society of Korea, leading the direction of the development of optical industry in Korea. As the ambassador of China-Korea Optoelectronics Exchange, Prof. Lee has also played an active role in Chinese optical events and activities. Over the years, he and the Journal So where did the story between Prof. Lee and the LIGHT journal begin? And what kind of link does the professor have with Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics (CIOMP)? How did he become a pioneer in optoelectronics technology? These are the questions we are eager to ask Prof. Byoungho Lee.The future cannot be predicted, but it can be invented, said Dennis Gabor who had invented holography. The pace of human technological advancements has never stopped. Who is to say that we cannot take a virtual tour of the Palace Museum or explore the north and south poles in the future? Scientists like Prof. Lee are working hard to use technology to provide mankind with an intelligent lifestyle, and lead a new technological trend. I am sure we are all looking forward to it. As a pioneer of optical electronics in Korea, Professor Byoungho Lee has been committed to the development of optical components used in VR and AR technologies. Biography: Byoungho Lee received his B.S. (1987) and M.S. (1989) degrees at Seoul National University and Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences at the University of California at Berkeley in 1993. He joined Seoul National University as a faculty member in September 1994 and is currently serving as the Dean of College of Engineering of the university. Prof. Lee is a Fellow of SPIE, OSA (Optica), IEEE, and the Society for Information Display (SID). He is also a (Senior) Member of the National Academy of Engineering of Korea and the Korean Academy of Science and Technology (KAST). He is, especially, in charge of managing the young scientists group of KAST (Y-KAST). He has served as the President of the Optical Society of Korea and now is serving as the president of the Korean Information Display Society. His research fields are 3D display, AR/VR display, and metasurface devices. He has received many awards including the National Science Badge of Jinbo-Jang of Korea and the Special Recognition Award of the SID.1. You and your team are developing advanced head-mounted displays for three-dimensional augmented reality, light field displays, and real-time three-dimensional microscopy. What do you think are the future development direction and application fields of 3D technology?With the recent interest in metaverse, more attention on optical devices for augment reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) are being payed. For AR and VR head-mounted or near-eye displays, because images are provided to both eyes in general, 3D effect is becoming important. 3D televisions were not successful in the past due to the cost and lack of 3D contents. However for AR/VR eye-wear systems, providing stereo images is essential and so, 3D display becomes unavoidable. In that sense, more research and development for 3D technology is needed.2. In recent years, new technologies such as VR  and AR  have received much attention from the public. You have been engaged in more high functioning optical elements such as lenses, polarizers, and spatial light modulators based on metasurfaces and holographic optical elements. What role do optical elements play in VR and AR technology? What are the current challenges?VR and AR systems require a kind of integration of many technologies from optics to sensors and image rendering. But the optics is a key in such devices. There are several important parameters such as eye-box size, resolution, field of view, focus cues, and form factor. There is a trade-off relationship among those parameters. To optimize the system with good performance, the display such as micro OLED and micro LED is important and the designing optics system is the most important part. To minimize eye-fatigue and reduce the volume and weight of the eye-wear system is the key player for the AR/VR systems to be really successfully commercialized.3. In 2018, you were invited to participate in Optics Frontier―The 10thInternational Conference on Information Optics and Photonics (CIOP 2018), and introduced the use of digital holography and machine learning in the capturing and separating of overlapping fingerprints, which has the advantage of being a non-destructive detection method. Can you tell us more about this technology please? Three years on, what are the latest achievements and progress of this technology?We made two systems. One is the digital holographic microscopy system that detects the 3D profile of fingerprint images. General commercialized digital holographic microscopy systems cannot be applied for fingerprint measurement because their capturing area is much smaller than the size of fingerprints. So, we developed a system that fits to our purpose. Another is to remove background noise and separate overlapped fingerprints by using the deep learning algorithm. The systems were very successful and we recently transferred our technologies to the Korean National Police Agency.4. As an ambassador for China-Korea optoelectronics exchanges, you have been actively involved with various Chinese academic organizations: China Optical Engineering Society, China Optical and Optoelectronics Manufactures Association, China Physical Society, as well as universities, research institutes, and other international organizations. Why are you so keen to participate in such activities? How do you evaluate the development of China’s optoelectronic industry?China has been rapidly growing both in research and technology development in optics, display, and photonics. In some areas, China has become world-leading key player. So China is an important county in my areas of optics and display technologies. Many professors in China have made venture companies to transfer their lab technologies to real fields, which is also very important and demanding in the society in these days.5. You are a Fellow of IEEE, OSA, SPIE, and SID, and a Member of the Korean Academy of Science and Technology, etc. What do you think you have gained from participating in these international academic organizations?I have served on the Board of Directors of OSA (recently changed its name to Optica) and is serving on the Board of Directors of SPIE. When I serve for the positions, I try to work to be helpful for the societies themselves. But on another hand, I have learned a lot from the procedure of strategic planning process and decision-making process of such huge well-organized international societies. The lesson was useful when I served as the President of the Optical Society of Korea and the President of the Korean Information Display Society. Currently, I am serving as the Dean of College of Engineering of Seoul National University. My international academic experience is also quite helpful in doing my job as the dean.6. You were the editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Optical Society of Korea, and the Journal of Information Display. In addition, you were also on the editorial board ofLight: Science & Applications(LIGHT), Advances in Optics and Photonics, Optics Letters, Applied Optics, Journal of the Society for Information Display, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, andApplied Physics B. What do you think are the similarities and differences in the development of journals in different countries?Light: Science & Applications and Photonics Research are high-profile journals. For professors to publish in high-impact journals becomes more important in these days for promotion and getting big government research fund. There are so many journals. So, it is important for journals to become journals that attract many readers and high-quality papers.To serve on the editorial board of journals are all similar. Of course, different journals have different impact factors. Editorial boards of many journals are keen to journal ranking or impact factor. There is competition among journals. The right way to pursue for each journal is to attract high-quality papers and serve for the community. Some China-based journals such as 7. As a former editorial board member ofLight: Science & Applications(LIGHT), can you talk about your relationship with the Journal? Do you have any expectations and suggestions for LIGHT?Light: Advanced Manufacturing.I was on the editorial board of LIGHT from the birth of the journal and I quit it a few years ago. That was because I thought it is important for the journal to recruit new young outstanding scholars on the editorial board. LIGHT is doing well. But I hope it could deal with more diverse topics and the review period needs to be further shortened. It is good for the journal to have a new sister journal 8. You have participated in the Light Conference organized by Light Publishing Group many times. What do you think of the conference? Any suggestions?It is an excellent high-quality conference series. My suggestion to improve the conference is to attract contributed poster presentations outside of China as well. Because the keynote and invited speakers are very distinguished scholars, if non-Chinese students could attend the conference it will be good for them and also CIOMP in promoting its research reputation.9. You and your research team have published 400+ peer-reviewed international journal papers, 700+ international conference papers, and 20+ books and chapters of books. Your accumulated citation reaches over 14,000 and h-index is 62. Do you have any tips or advice for students and young researchers on how to write a high-quality academic paper?It is needed to make graduate students have ambition that they want to do world top research and compete with world top research groups in their fields. Well organizing of the labs in such a way that senior graduate students train junior graduate students both in theory and experiment is also important. If the laboratory is too personalized, knowledge and know-how of previous students are not delivered to new students. Collaboration with other groups with open mind is also necessary for high-quality synergy research. In general students and scholars are very keen on the first authorship and corresponding authorship. Fair decision regarding the authorship is important for continuing collaborative research.10. You have received many distinguished academic awards such as the Jinbo-Jang National Science Medal of Korea, the Special Recognition Award of the Society for Information Display, the Grand Academic Award of the Optical Society of Korea, etc. How do you feel about these honors?I really appreciate all the awards and am proud of them. I have served on many awards committees including the Award Committee of Board of Directors of OSA. For good awards, there are so many highly qualified candidates. Even if one is not successful in receiving any award, one needs not to be depressed. In many cases, to be included in the final list of candidates is an honor itself. If one is not in the list of candidates, he or she does not have any chance to be awarded. In that sense, it is better for someone to nominate you or you apply for awards in some cases. But too many applications might not be so good. It does not give good impression to evaluation committee members.11. For the 60thanniversary of the establishment of the Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CIOMP), you were invited to attend the Photonics Trend 2012 International Conference that year. In 2018, at the invitation of the OSA/SPIE Student Branch of CIOMP, you visited CIOMP again. What is your impression of CIOMP?With several visits I became to know about the CIOMP quite well. CIOMP is the first research institute in optics established in China. I have witnessed many eager researchers and students of CIOMP. Optics and photonics have diverse areas from fundamental research to applications. My understanding is that CIOMP is a very outstanding institute especially in the research of optical engineering and applications.12. COVID-19 has changed our lives greatly. Many scientific research projects have been interrupted or delayed. Online international conferences have become the new norm. Personally, do you prefer online conferences or offline? Could you give some suggestions or advice to help researchers go through this unusually tough period?International optical academic societies have evaluated the online conferences that were held after the COVID-19 situation. In fact, online conferences were not so successful. Although many people have registered for the conferences, number of views for each presentation video was below expectation in general except for distinguished invited talks. To my understanding, online exhibitions were not so successful either. For online international conferences, because registered people access the conferences from their countries at work or at home, their attention is distracted. Another factor is to build up human relationship and network, which can be hardly done by online conferences. In US most conferences are now being converted to the format of offline conferences or hybrid conferences. Although online conferences are not so successful generally speaking, I advise the researchers to take a full advantage of online conferences by watching good talks. Differently from offline conferences, you can look at the presentation slides in detail.13. You received your Ph.D. degree from the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of California at Berkeley. What do you think you have gained from your Ph.D. studies? What impact did it have on your subsequent research career?I had received my B.S. and Master degrees from Seoul National University and then went to UC Berkeley with the Korean National Scholarship. To study at such a world-leading university with a kind of freely-thinking environment made me grow much not only in knowledge but also in ways of thinking. In these days Seoul National University is doing very well in research and publishing high-quality papers. A rapid growth of the university research level was greatly enabled by the faculty members who had had good experiences at top universities and top research institutes or companies in more advanced countries. Now situation has changed and many top undergraduate students remain at my university as graduate students. Some of my graduate students are recruited by famous ICT companies in US after graduation.14. From a student to a scientist, a teacher and an academician, how do you think your attitude toward scientific research has changed over the years?As a graduate student my major concern was my project and fulfillment for getting Ph.D. degree. When I became a professor, first it was a great (but happy) burden to set up future research directions and obtain research funds. As time goes by, to perform outstanding research became more important. With serving as the President of the Optical Society of Korea and the President of the Korean Information Display Society, and now as the Dean of College of Engineering, my view became wider and wider and I used to think about what would be future prevailing technologies.15. What obstacles or difficulties have you encountered in your research work? How did you overcome these difficulties?In some cases, the output of my research projects is not going well as I originally planned. That is because the original plan was too optimistic and ambitious. In those cases, I revisit the original proposal and think about what was not good from the beginning. I discuss with my students about how we can resolve the issues and make progresses.16. In your life and career, who has the biggest influence on you and in what way?Besides the religion, my wife is the most affective person to me. I discuss many issues and difficulties in my daily life with my wife.17. How do you balance your work and family life?I work quite much. I read papers at home and work with notebook computer at home as well. But at the same time, I communicate with my wife and two daughters quite well. My family know about my jobs and schedule well. I spend much time with my family for discussion on family issues, give regular rides to my second daughter, and dine together. For that, I reduce my outside activities with other people, especially in weekend.18. What advice do you have for young researchers?Dr. Dennis Gabor, who was the inventor of the concept of holography, said “The future cannot be predicted, but futures can be invented.” This wording was modified later by several other people. For example, Alan Kay said “The best way to predict the future is to invent it,” Some people can achieve great performance that affect the society much, while some do not. The attitude of enjoying your work, hoping you will make something very advantageous for human being, is good enough for your research life. And the attitude of thinking big is also important for the growth as a scientist, engineer, or academician.Light special correspondentHui Wang is the Deputy Director of the Office of International Cooperation in the Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics (CIOMP), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). She currently works on international communication and cooperation for the CIOMP and was a founding member for the Nature Publishing Group and CIOMP joint journal Light: Science & Applications. She is the founder of “Rose in Science” and has published several articles in Acta Editologica, International Talent, Light: Science & Applications, etc., and was invited to take an interview by SPIE Women in Optics, which was published in 2015.Cun Yu works at the Office of International Cooperation in the Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics (CIOMP), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Her main duties cover the Sino-Belarus International Innovation Center, international cooperation projects and exchanges between CIOMP and institutions in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. She has published multiple articles in the journal International Talent, Light: Science & Applications, and is a member of CSA’s Science & Technology Translations Association.


With this student collection, PCD celebrates the 10-year anniversary of our efforts to build scientific publishing skills and abilities among students. The primary aims of PCD’s student manuscripts have evolved over the years. Specifically, we aim to 1) provide an opportunity to become familiar with a journal’s manuscript submission requirements and peer review process; 2) foster connections among student knowledge and training, the conduct of quality research, and a journal’s publication expectations; 3) develop research and scientific writing skills to become producers of knowledge, rather than just consumers of knowledge; 4) provide an opportunity to become a first author on a peer-reviewed article; and 5) promote supportive, respectful, and mutually beneficial mentee relationships that strengthen students’ ability to generate and submit scholarly manuscripts throughout their professional careers (PCD published articles of winning student manuscripts from 2011 through 2015 and in 2017 and 2018. From 2011 through 2015, manuscripts were screened and reviewed by a panel of peer reviewers who identified an overall winner whose manuscript was ultimately published . In addiOver the years, PCD has refined eligibility requirements for students interested in submitting research manuscripts to the journal. Students must be a high school graduate, an undergraduate or graduate student, a medical resident, or a postdoctoral fellow. Authors must meet the journal’s criteria to be recognized as first author; that is, they must have prepared the first draft and conducted research on or practiced in the topic addressed in the manuscript. In addition, their work must have been completed within the previous 12 months. Manuscripts submitted for PCD consideration cannot be under consideration by another journal. PCD only considers Original Research or GIS Snapshots for student submissions. Most importantly, the author must serve in the combined roles of the manuscript’s first author and the corresponding author, which allows direct communication with the editor in chief and journal staff members. Students in this role receive critical instruction at every stage of scholarly publication, from submission, to peer review, to editorial revision, to production, and finally, to publication.PCD’s student articles released to date address topics relevant to the prevention, screening, and surveillance of population-based interventions for chronic diseases, including but not limited to arthritis, cancer, diabetes, depression, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Of the 38 manuscripts submitted for the PCD 2021 Student Research Collection, 10 successfully completed our rigorous internal and external peer-review process and multiple revisions. PCD sincerely appreciates our associate editors, the editorial board, members of the statistics review committee, and the many peer reviewers who provided detailed comments and suggestions to student authors. We congratulate each student author who developed and submitted a manuscript for consideration, whether it was accepted or not.The current collection addresses a broad range of topics, including childhood obesity in secondary schools in Hong Kong ; nutritihttps://www.cdc.gov/pcd/announcements.htm. The deadline for submissions is Monday, March 28, 2022. PCD looks forward to continuing its commitment to the development of scientific writing and publishing skills among students. For more information about the journal and previous collections of student articles, please visit the PCD website at https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/index.htm.PCD is pleased to announce the Call for Student Papers: 2022 Publishing Opportunity for Students. Information about submission requirements are available on the PCD Announcements page at


Epidemiology and Health (epiH), I would like to express my gratitude to the authors and readers for their contributions last year. In fact, 2021 was among the most memorable years in the history of epiH. Last July, epiH was included in Clarivate’s Journal Citation Report for the first time. This occurred not long after I was appointed editor-in-chief on June 1. epiH received a good Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of 3.282, ranking 142nd out of 374 journals in the “Public, Environmental & Occupational Health” category. epiH was founded in 1979 under the name of Korean Journal of Epidemiology, and 30 years later, it was reborn as an English-language journal by changing its name to Epidemiology and Health (epiH). I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the 7 former editors-in-chief for their superb leadership. In particular, Moran Ki, who served as editor-in-chief from June 2013 to May 2021, made remarkable achievements by having epiH listed in the most important journal directories, including MEDLINE, Scopus, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Korea Citation Index (KCI), Emerging Sources Citation Index (eSCI), and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE).On behalf of the editorial board members of epiH has become an important international journal in the fields of epidemiology and public health. In 2021, a total of 784 manuscripts were received from 76 countries, of which 645 (82.3%) were submitted from outside of Korea. Among them, 103 articles, reflecting a 13.1% acceptance rate, were published, including 62 from Korea, 18 from other Asian countries, 9 from America, 8 from Europe, and 6 from Africa. By publishing 23 research papers and perspectives on COVID-19 issues, epiH has contributed to coping with the public health crisis caused by the pandemic.In addition to receiving its first JIF, other remarkable developments took place in 2021. epiH, I would also like to recognize with gratitude the dedication of reviewers and editors. Last year, 187 scholars served as external reviewers for submitted papers. In particular, I would like to express my great gratitude to professors Daejung Kim (who reviewed 7 papers), Sanghyuk Bae (who reviewed 7 papers), and Boyoung Park (who reviewed 6 papers). I would also like to express sincere thanks to the 24 editors who were in charge of the internal and external review process of the submitted papers. Associate editor Jong-Hun Kim managed as many as 96 papers; Hyeon Chang Kim, Hyesook Park, and Hae-Kwan Cheong managed more than 80 papers; and Moran Ki and Hyeon Woo Yim managed more than 50 papers. I would also like to thank the editorial staff members, Young-Ju Lee and Young Ju Choi, for handling the rapidly increasing number of papers without any problems. Furthermore, I deeply appreciate Soon Young Lee, president of the Korean Society of Epidemiology, and the board of directors for their full support.In addition to acknowledging the contributions made by the authors who have submitted their work to Hopefully, in 2022, we can successfully overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, restore the collapsing healthcare system, and reverse worsening health inequalities. Finally, I would like to express my sincere respect to my fellow epidemiologists and health care professionals around the world who are working hard to achieve these goals.


Parasites & Vectors (or just P&V) was officially launched in 2008 [Filaria Journal and Kinetoplastid Biology and Disease. As an author, I liked P&V at first sight. The main features of the new journal were fast processing of manuscripts and fair refereeing and editorial decision-making. More than that, Prof. Chris Arme, the founding Editor, created a new community, nurturing the spirit of collaboration between authors, reviewers, handling editors and publisher. This was remarkable and positively affected the publishing experience of authors, from initial submission to the final online publication. I experienced this myself as an author back in 2008 [P&V. in 2008 , also inP&V has emerged as a leading journal, publishing high-quality manuscripts on parasites, vectors and vector-borne diseases. Incidentally, in the new Journal Citation Reports, the impact factor of P&V increased from 2.824 (2019) to 3.876 (2020)! This is an outstanding achievement and places P&V among the top journals (quartile 1) in the field of parasitology and tropical medicine. This achievement is certainly a result of integrated efforts from authors, reviewers, editors and journal staff. This also highlights that P&V is a well-regarded journal by the scientific community and that manuscripts published in this journal are highly cited.During the past 13 years, P&V activities since its foundation. In this sense, I am indebted to Prof. Chris Arme and Prof. Aneta Kostadinova, former Editors-in-Chief, for the numerous opportunities given to act as reviewer, associate editor and subject editor. In November 2020, I became the Editor-in-Chief of P&V, which is a great honour and a great responsibility.I have been involved with Dipteran vectors and associated diseases ;Helminths and helminthic diseases ;Parasite genetics, genomics and proteomics ;Parasites of veterinary importance ;Protozoa and protozoan diseases ;Ticks and tick-borne diseases .During the past months, we refreshed the sections and the team of Subject and Associate Editors. The journal is currently structured with the following sections:https://parasitesandvectors.biomedcentral.com/manuscripts/sections). Submitting authors may feel that their manuscripts could fit in one or more sections, and this is okay. For instance, a manuscript reporting a study on Leishmania parasites might fit best in the section Protozoa and protozoan diseases , Dipteran vectors and associated diseases , Parasites of veterinary importance  or even Parasite genetics, genomics and proteomics . So, submitting authors should choose the most appropriate section according to the main focus of their manuscripts.The full list of Associate Editors and more information about each section is available at our homepage . The objective is to provide detailed information for the submitting authors to prepare their manuscripts according to the journal style and standards. We believe this will expedite the production time and increase the overall quality of the published papers. Springer Nature also offers a number of author services, including academic translation, manuscript formatting and figure services . I strongly recommend these services for authors needing English editing and also technical support to prepare high-quality figures, for instance. This will directly and positively impact on the quality of their published papers.We have also recently published a new Editorial Style Guide . We welcome high-quality manuscripts on all aspects of the basic and applied biology of parasites, parasitic diseases, intermediate hosts, vectors and vector-borne pathogens. Besides traditional and well-established areas of science in these fields, we aim to provide a platform for publication of the rapidly developing resources and technology in parasite, intermediate host and vector genetics, genomics, proteomics. Manuscripts addressing broader issues, such as economics, social sciences and global climate change in relation to parasites, vectors and parasitic disease control, are also considered. If you are unsure whether your paper is in scope for P&V, you can submit a pre-submission enquiry, providing an abstract of your work. I will be pleased to provide you a timely response.We have also slightly changed the scope of P&V will continue to serve as a platform for scientists from all over the world to publish their manuscripts reporting new developments in the field of parasites and vectors. Last but not least, I will continue to nurture the spirit seeded 13 years ago by Prof. Chris Arme, to foster the collaboration between authors, reviewers, editors and journal staff.As Editor-in-Chief, I shall ensure that


KI Reports continues to grow with publications of clinical and translational research in kidney disease authored by an increasingly diverse group of researchers for a widespread global readership—one that benefits from the open-access model.In the last 2 years, we experienced a dramatic increase in manuscript submissions due to both COVID-19 and non–COVID-19 areas of kidney research. The COVID-19 content of the journal has been particularly notable; some of our reports in the early stages of the pandemic included those on collapsing glomerulopathy, AKI associated with high recovery rates, and protocols for management of affected kidney transplant recipients.Our ability to publish findings quickly after acceptance—a long-standing feature valued by authors—was particularly valuable for authors given the rapid pace with which our understanding of the pandemic was growing.Despite the pandemic, we continue to aspire to meet the needs of nephrology researchers and the kidney community at large. An example of this effort is our widely popular Research Letters, which allow authors to report findings of significance in a condensed and focused manner. Our online format allows unlimited room for supplementary information so that additional methods, analysis, and graphics can be provided without sacrificing important methodological and other details. As a journal with an international reach, we also recognize the need for clinical studies on kidney disease from all over the globe, including regions with limited resources but important data to share. Our commitment to support and encourage the dissemination of these data has led to the creation of the “Regional Reports” section of the journal.KI. Sophia Ambruso from Denver, Colorado, USA, has joined the team as well. She oversees the creation of the graphical abstracts with the help of a talented team of graphical artists. Our newly improved graphical abstracts create compelling and effective visual summaries of studies. Dr. Ambruso spearheads our increased social media engagement, with the contributions of our new Twitter Editor, Gerren Hobby, some of our graphical artists, and a team of Nephrology Social Media Collective interns. This effort helps to share research while creating the opportunity for authors and readers to engage in meaningful dialogue.We expanded our editorial team to include Anna Francis from Brisbane, Australia, after completion of her editorial fellowship at KI, the flagship ISN publication, remains strong. We continue to transfer quality articles submitted to KI that could not be accommodated based on space limitations/priority grounds. This process ensures that quality research on kidney disease is published and benefits some authors by saving time in the submission and/or peer review process.Our relationship with KI Reports continues to grow and evolve as we strive to reflect the geographic diversity of our authors in the board members. In 2021, we added board members from Africa, Australia, Canada, and Europe, and broadened the expertise that is represented on our Board.The editorial board of KI Reports.Finally, none of these acheivements would have been possible without the authors who trust us with their research findings and our peer reviewers, whose commitment to providing excellent, thoughtful, and constructive reviews ensures that we continue to publish the highest quality research in kireports.editor@cumc.columbia.edu.We look forward to connecting with you—our readers—and welcome comments. Feel free to e-mail us at KI Reports; received research grants from Travere and Bayer; is on the steering committee for Travere; and serves as a consultant/advisory board member for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Angion Biomedica, Akebia Pharmaceuticals, Equillium Bio, Sanofi Genzyme, Reistone Biopharma, Travere, and GlaxoSmithKline. SM is the Deputy Editor of KI Reports and is a consultant for and has received grant support from Angion BioMedica. RM is the Executive Editor of KI Reports.JR is the Editor-in-Chief of


The choices authors make about where to submit their papers are complicated but are typically based on the Journal’s prestige. Prestige is generally determined using metrics based on the number of citations papers have received in a journal over a specific period. The measure that is perhaps most influencial is the Journal Citation Report, Impact Factor . There aJournal of Advanced Nursing, I argued that there are other metrics—time papers are in review, rejection rate—that Journal editors should tell their readers about to enable them to make an more informed and rounded judgement about where to submit their research ). Nursing Reports were read and downloaded a total of 12,368 and 7502 times, respectively. Papers in the Journal were cited 53 times in 2020. More granular citation and download information can be access via this link: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/nursrep/stats (accessed on 27 March 2021). In 2020 papers published in Nursing Reports Special Issues that we are currently working on: “Evidence-Based Practice and Personalized Care” with Athena Patelarou as the editor and “Nursing and COVID-19” edited by Sonia Udod and Richard Gray. More information about these Special Issues can be access via this link: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/nursrep/special_issues (accessed on 27 March 2021). We have two Nursing Reports is indexed with Clarivate Analytics on the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). The ESCI index includes peer-reviewed publications of regional importance and in emerging scientific fields. Additionally, Nursing Reports is indexed in CINHAL , the most extensive and in-depth nursing database covering 1937 to present. Nursing Reports has done well over the past six months; a good number of papers have been published and are being read and cited by academic colleagues internationally. Submissions to the Journal have been handled in an exceptionally timely manner. That said, there is much work to do to achieve our objective of making Nursing Reports a leading nursing science journal by 2023. Below I wanted to set out some of our priorities and intended ways of working for 2021. Across a range of metrics, For 2021 we aim to publish 60 research or review papers, six editorials and multiple letters to the editor. We are not currently looking to expand our team of associate editors. That said, we are committed that when such opportunities arise, we will follow an open, transparent, merit-based appointment process.We aspire to an editorial board that represents the broad constituency of nursing across the world. Throughout 2021 we plan to recruit 25 new editorial board members from geographic regions that are currently under-represented, that is to say Asia, Africa and the Middle East. We will primarily recruit by inviting esteemed colleagues to join, but also welcome post-doctoral nurse researchers applying to join the board by writing to me, setting out their research track record and explaining what they think they would bring to the Journal.Nursing Reports currently operates a single-blind peer review system, that is to say, that the authors do not know the names of the reviewers, but reviewers know the names of authors. Whilst single-blinded review does have critics ). We note that many leading nursing science journals do not report handling times, making a direct comparison difficult.example, ), it is The journal operates optional open peer-review: authors are given the option for all review reports and editorial decisions to be published alongside their manuscript. Authors can alter their choice for open review at any time before publication, but once the paper has been published changes will only be made at the discretion of the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. In addition, reviewers can sign their review, i.e., identify themselves in the published review reports. To guarantee impartial refereeing, the names of referees will be revealed only if the referees agree to do so, and after a paper has been accepted for publication.Nursing Reports are class leading. In 2021 we intend to maintain the timely production of papers accepted for publication.The time from a paper being accepted to publication is an important metric; many authors will have experienced frustration at having a paper accepted and then waiting months until the manuscript appears on the journal website for colleagues to read and digest. Again, comparative data are sparse, but we are confident that the acceptance to publication times for Nursing Reports and hope to see an increase in the number we publish in 2021.In leading medical journals, almost half of the documents published each year are letters. In nursing journals, exceptionally few letters to the editor are published. This is disappointing—and frankly concerning—as post-publication scrutiny of published research is an essential part of the scientific method . I encouNursing Reports where the author has pre-registered (before the first participant is enrolled) the study will receive a “pre-registered study” badge. Authors that can demonstrate– via the submission of a correctly completed reporting guideline checklist (that can be accessed via https://www.equator-network.org/ (accessed on 27 March 2021)) will receive a “Reporting Guideline Compliant” badge.Old or young, everyone loves getting a badge for doing something exceptionally well. There is not time or space in this editorial to go into detail about merits to pre-registration and adherence to reporting guidelines, except to say that both make the conduct and reporting of science better. Studies—be they experimental, observational or qualitative—published in We aim to publish six editorials in 2021 that we hope will provoke debate and discussion among nurse scientists. It could be argued that in some nursing journal’s editorial authorship is confined to an “elite” few. We want to invite readers with an idea for an editorial to submit to the Editor-in-Chief a 50-word pitch that I, and at least one other editorial board member, will review. We will either commission you to draft and submit your editorial or provide feedback about how you might improve your idea. If colleagues want guidance on how to write an editorial, I might direct them to an editorial I wrote a few years back [Nursing Reports is on a path to inclusion in the Journal Citation Report, and we have set ourselves the ambitious target of being included in the 2022 report that will be published in June 2023.As I have already argued, Impact Factor is a metric of journal quality but by no means the only one. Nursing Reports aims to publish at least two Special Issues a year, each with approximately 10-15 papers. If you are interested in editing a special edition, we will welcome your proposal; further details can be identified via this link: https://www.mdpi.com/journalproposal/sendproposalspecialissue/nursrep (accessed on 27 March 2021).Special Issues are an excellent way of collating ideas around an important topic or theme. As a target, Nursing Reports is keen to implement Registered Reports in 2021. That said, nurse researchers have not engaged with registered reports, and there are few examples in the literature. Further, some nursing journals that were early adopters of registered reports have unfortunately decided to back away from this form of publication because of a “lack of good quality papers” [Registered Reports focus on the importance of the proposed research question and the rigour of methodology by reviewing and publishing the protocol before data collection. Journal editors then provisionally commit to publishing the study results as long as the research adhered to (or justified changes) the methods in the published protocol. Registered reports are intended to eradicate many questionable research practices, including low statistical power, selective reporting of results, and publication bias. Consistent with the principals and philosophy of open access publication,  papers” . ConsequWe launched a Nursing Reports Twitter account (@NursRep_MDPI) in early 2021, have been actively tweeting and are building followers. Please follow the journal and share our tweets.Nursing Reports is performing across a range of quality metrics that matter to you. By reflecting on our performance, I, in collaboration with associate editors, editors and editorial board members, have set out a program of work for 2021 that will further improve the quality of the Journal with the aim of Nursing Reports becoming seen as a target journal for nurse researchers to publish their best work. My colleagues and I want an open dialogue with readers and authors that engage with the Journal, and we welcome your feedback on ways in which you think the way we work and publish can be improved.The aim of this report card is to tell you—the reader—about how


Unlike the mainstream academic curriculum, research orientation is not part of the hospital-based medicine syllabus. At present, there is a dearth of training in research for young scholars starting their careers as junior residents for obtaining a postgraduate degree in any discipline of medicine. These individuals often experience helplessness as untrained researchers. It is evident that the current academic system, especially in developing countries, is not going to evolve in the near future or offer appropriate training in research methodology and publication. Therefore, the last resort is to go through a self-learning module on how to conduct research and publish articles. This article is designed as a self-help module for those interested in research and publication, particularly in the field of oncology.Why do researchers publish articles? The most appropriate reason would be that they have discovered some new science/philosophy and would like the world to know about it. A less altruistic and rather materialistic reason is to get higher academic degrees, such as Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and Doctor of Medicine (MD). Therefore, the art of publishing is not proportional to the significance of the invention; the dynamics are typically non-linear.For a young researcher who aspires to have a good publication record, it is indispensable to know the methodology of publishing an article. Discovering new science although a prerequisite may not be sufficient for the publication of an article. The hurdles associated with a good publication include a flawed study design and inappropriate methodology, lack of clarity and reproducibility, and most importantly, difficulty in translating research into a publication.,2 Therefore, in this article, I have attempted to briefly discuss only the salient features of the technique of writing a research paper.A search on Google Scholar with the search strings, “how to write a scientific paper” and “how to write a paper” returned about 1.8 million and 3.7 million results, respectively, making it one of the most investigated topics. There is plenty of literature in the form of articles and books which describes the technique of writing a paper. Numerous authors have already elaborately discussed how to write scientific articles and respond to critics.This article provides guidelines for research beginners on how to publish scientific articles, with a detailed flowchart of the various stages of publication . Althoug The difficulties associated with publishing in oncology in developing and at times even in developed countries, include a lack of systematic research programs, except in a few institutions, reluctance and ignorance about publishing, lack of dedicated time for research amidst clinical, academic, regulatory, and administrative work, no academic or financial credit for research and publication as the clinical establishments are not under the direct supervision of any university, lack of training in how to publish, very poor scientific language (namely English), lack of guidance from a supervisor (PhD guide or co-guide), lack of a sustainable attitude to make repeated corrections in an article, dearth of instruments, resources or facilities, and absence of access to journals/literature.Cancer research is one of the most globally active domains of science. Between 2001 and 2015, a total of 62,550 research articles on radiotherapy were published from 127 countries in 2531 international journals.The most important point for research, and hence for publication, is the habit of constructive and sustained thinking about a problem. This, in turn, builds an attitude to tackle any given problem in a scientific manner.The technique of publication encompasses cultivating and fostering a new idea. Whatever be the idea, one should spend considerable time thinking and working on it. Although not essential, it could be useful to get help from others.Medical professionals need to find time regardless of their busy schedules. However, sometimes, people keep themselves busy in unproductive work; therefore, individuals or groups need to rationalize how they spend their time and find suitable intervals for research work. Time management comes from the consciousness, urge, and dedication towards research and publication. With smart and parallel workflow management, it is possible to spare about 3–3.5 hours per day for research and publication. Writing 5–10 lines a day is more than sufficient for publishing more than four articles in a year. However, writing five lines a day is possible only when someone has been thinking about the problem for hours or days. However, researchers should not get overwhelmed in such situations as they hold very little significance for publication. The research design should be aligned with the available facilities. An advantage of a setup that lacks facilities is the availability of a large number of patients, which can be thoughtfully exploited for research. Oncology is a field where the most important aspects of research are patient follow-up, survival, fear psychosis, mental agony, and financial distress. These subjects are extremely vast and selectively ignored in the present context of oncology research in developing countries. In the field of oncology and medical physics, patients are more important than the technology.Lack of machines or facilities is a hostile situation for researchers in developing and underdeveloped countries. Articles can be requested from the corresponding author(s), and usually, they fulfill the request. Several countries have World Health Organization-sponsored Hinari/Research for health initiatives, a program under which all the literature is freely available.Not having access to literature is a serious problem and can be circumvented partially by using various networking sites and search engines such as ResearchGate and Google Scholar.in vivo EPID dosimetry for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment of the prostate” published in Physics in Medicine and Biology.This is the most important aspect of publishing a research article. Incorrect or insufficient literature review may lead to working on an already solved problem, both for a standalone experiment or an MD/PhD thesis. PubMed and Google Scholar can be used effectively for a literature search. For example, if a researcher wants to work on electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry, or more specifically forward-and back-projection EPID dosimetry, he/she should use the search term “EPID Dosimetry” in Google Scholar. The search will return a list of articles sorted according to their relevance with the most cited ones being displayed first. Furthermore, filters can be used to display only the recently published articles. For instance, I restricted my search to the articles published in 2018 and found the article titled, “Comparison of forward-and back-projection The article is referenced comprehensively, and reviewing these references partially or completely can provide insights into the work carried out in forward- and back-projection EPID dosimetry so far.Citing sources and building bibliographies is a complex process. It gets even more complex if researchers are at the end of a big project like PhD and begin to organize and cite the references. One can use a reference management tool like EndNote for organizing the references.It is essential to realize how an experimental outcome will be beneficial for society. The likelihood of publication of an article is directly proportional to its applicability in the society. Therefore, it is necessary to preserve the experimental setup, if possible, until the data are published; sometimes, based on the reviewers’ comments, researchers might have to perform new experiments or reanalyze the data. In studies involving human subjects , it is essential to get approval from an institutional ethics committee/institutional review board along with registering the project in a publicly accessible clinical trials registry. Write down the important points and arguments that should be discussed in each section. An elaborate discussion on paper writing skills can be found in Grech et al. and Maloy’s articles.,2This is divided into two parts, (i) writing and structuring of the article, i.e., editorial corrections and (ii) linguistic corrections; these broadly include the corrections pertaining to the use of scientific English. Both of these areas are equally important. Following are some important guidelines on writing and structuring the article. Create a basic outline of the salient features of the study. Structure the article in the IMRAD format IMRAD format  sectionsIt is essential for untrained researchers to express their ideas in proper scientific English. Articles not written in scientific English often face rejection. Emphasis on grammatical and linguistic correctness by reviewers is justified from the perspective of the readers’ understanding of the article. A reviewer may not always be ready to overlook the poor linguistic quality of an article. However, if the scientific content of the article is of high quality, the reviewer might suggest professional language correction. Publication-grade English language correction can be performed within 3–5 days by professional language editors. However, such services often do not include an editorial or structural correction. Scientific English editing is a flourishing business, and these services are offered by all the leading publishers. Universities also offer grammatical correction services at nominal rates to their research scholars. If the topic of research is good, it is advisable to seek professional language correction as this significantly increases the chance of acceptance for publication in major journals.Following is the unconventional way of making linguistic and structural corrections to a research article. Select one or two articles published in high-impact journals. These articles should be relevant to your area of research. Mimic the structural and preferably the linguistic flow of the article. This will help produce the first draft of the manuscript, which can be further modified especially in terms of the scientific content. However, it is essential to note that it is not advisable to blindly copy the contents from published literature as this would constitute plagiarism. One may seek help from an amateur language editor from the scientific community. A few senior editors may also be willing to perform language corrections; they can be rewarded by offering them co-authorship on the article.International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology and Physics and for Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment are always very fair as they follow a double-blinded peer-review policy.Article rejection is the biggest reality in the life of any researcher. Even though it can be frustrating, it should be taken in stride. The peer-review process at times is very subjective and may not be able to evaluate the actual potential of the article. However, currently, we do not have any better methods than the present peer-review system. There are different kinds of peer-review processes, discussion on these processes is beyond the scope of this article; however, it is advisable to consider journals that follow a double-blinded peer review, as their review process is free from any kind of bias and provides a fair judgment on the article. For example, the reviews from the ,11The time frame for a paper to get published may vary from 6 months  to as high as 3 years . This can be attributed to several factors, the most prominent ones being the scientific content of the article and the scope of the journal. I wrote two articles that recently got published: the first one got published after 5 months, whereas the second one took 2.8 years.In case of delayed publication, meticulous record-keeping is essential. Often, the referee questions are repeated between journals during various rounds of revisions. These repeated questions can be easily answered if there is an organized record of the comments from the previous referees and their responses. A PhD scholar cannot afford an indefinite timeline for publication; therefore, it is necessary to consider the optimal publication time frame when choosing potential journals.Selection of a topic for a degree can be tricky, but it is often supervised by the guide or co-guide. In case of lack of guidance for the selection of the topic, one must choose a broad area of research. For an MD degree in any of the oncology disciplines, the topic should be up to date and should not be a repetition of previous work. Topics such as tumor recurrence and survival analysis are interesting; however, these are often ignored as most students prefer to study the difference in the efficacy between two drugs or aspects related to surgical and radiation techniques. Only a few publish their MD thesis work. This is a drawback of the system which does not encourage its students to explore other areas of research.In several developing countries, students in the discipline of Medical Physics receive their PhD degrees in Physics or allied subjects instead of Medical Physics because of the unavailability of a dedicated department for this subject in the universities. However, scholars should try to keep the study restricted to medical physics, radiation oncology, biomedical engineering, or computational techniques.Researchers who are good at mathematics should make an effort to blend medical physics with mathematics. Relevant mathematical formulation can help to get a paper published easily. PhD scholars who lack guidance for choosing a thesis topic should also select a broad and accommodative topic of research. This may help in getting a number of related publications required for the PhD thesis.–14 Publications not related to attainment of one’s degree should preferably be in SCI/Scopus journals. Scopus contains 37,535 journals across all subjects. Specifically for publishing in oncology journals, a master list is available from “Cancer Index;” this includes journals from all oncology specialties.,16 However, for Medical Physics, such a list of journals is not available. A summarized list of journals for oncology and medical physics is provided in In general, universities accept the publications in the journals included in the Scopus list of journals, and in the science citation index (SCI) list.Journals can be categorized as (1) open accesses (OA) – without article processing charges (APCs), (2) subscription based-transformative journals, or (3) OA with APC. Few universities discourage publishing in OA with APC journals for MD/PhD degrees. Additionally, as APCs are high, research groups without financial support should avoid such journals.One should be careful not to have one’s articles published in a predatory journal(s). A predatory journal has no peer-review system or editorial board, and often seeks articles from the authors through personal communication. These journals publish worthless articles and sometimes ask for APC after claiming that the article has been accepted for publication.The best way to avoid predatory journals is to select a target journal for publication from the Scopus database and to consider the SJR. Journals with an SJR and those listed in Scopus are not predatory journals.Repetition of research that has already been done is the most common issue in an unsupervised research project conducted by an untrained researcher. The three typical examples of a research topic for each modality of oncology practice are (1) efficacy of concurrent chemotherapy (temozolomide) and radiotherapy in glioblastoma, (2) describing the surgical technique of radical neck dissection for head-and-neck cancer, and (3) dosimetric comparison between VMAT and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. As these topics are well researched, the findings cannot be published unless they are new. The choice of topic should therefore include something new and its finite yield.It is important to understand that not everyone will publish many articles. In the western and developed countries as well, only a fraction of the total number of practicing oncologists/medical physicists are engaged in research. For medical physicists not working in academic institutions, it is not essential to have a PhD degree; however, it is strongly recommended. A PhD degree can uplift an individual to the level of his/her counterpart in other fraternities like teaching (assistant professor) or medicine (MD/DNB). In such cases, a limited research career of 5–7 years can be opted for.Contrarily, people who are passionate about research should opt for an extended research career and things will automatically evolve for the individual over time; no specific suggestion is required. Mushrooming journals add to this confusion by claiming high impact factors (IFs) for themselves. Often, journals claim IFs and listings such as the global impact factor (GIF), universal impact factor (UIF), Citefactor, KoreaMed, Synapse, PubMed, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar. GIF, UIF, and Citefactor are fake IFs and damage the prestige and reliability of scientific research and scholarly journals. The other websites such as KoreaMed, Synapse, PubMed, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar work more like search engines. The only dependable IF is the Thomson Reuters (IF) through the SCI or extended SCI (eSCI). This article exclusively reports the Thomson Reuters IFs available from Clarivate analytics.This is a term known to everyone, but the concept can be rather confusing.Cancer Journal for clinicians. In general, any oncology journal with an IF between 3.0 and 6.5 is considered good for publication. However, for beginners, it may be challenging to publish an article in a journal with an IF of 2.5; therefore, they can consider journals with an IF between 0.7 and 2.5. A series of recommended journals in medical physics is listed in The IFs of oncology journals vary widely, with the highest among all journals across all disciplines being 292.27 in 2019 for CA – Young professionals with a research inclination often ask, “I read and understood an article; what should I do next?” The answer is to think it over for a sufficient period of time. Although this is a philosophically correct answer, it may not convey the intended message to the person asking this question. Therefore, I decided to write this article after one and a half decade of extensive experience in research and publication. It is essential to start from scratch by looking at each problem from the first principle. Individuals who develop the ability to think without any help or guidance from others and gain considerable experience in research often come up with many innovative world class ideas.Publishing is a skill primarily based on the sustained practice of thinking, which needs to be acquired over the years with or without any guidance. Oncology research in developing countries often needs to be carried out while juggling regular clinical, academic, regulatory, and administrative responsibilities. Young researchers need to find time for research activities and publication. Therefore, for fruitful experimental work and paper writing, researchers must be enthusiastic and invest at least 2 hours a day in thinking about their research problem and paper writing. No research topic is more interesting and important than humans.Persistently thinking about the problem and summarizing the thoughts in text whenever time permits are essential. If financially viable, a researcher should avail professional language editing services, as this increases the chances of publication.Until there is sufficient academic and financial support, oncology researchers in developing countries have to come forward with goodwill and passion to learn how to publish and put it into practice; this will help the future researchers attain good research orientation.


Matthew Quaife is an assistant professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), UK. His interests are health economics and mathematical modelling specialising in public health and infectious disease prevention. Currently, his research projects are focused on COVID-19 transmission in low- and middle-income settings, as well as evaluation of tuberculosis (TB) modelling to study the cost-effectiveness and equity impact of vaccines and digital adherence technologies.Shuai Li is a Victorian Cancer Agency Early Career Research Fellow at the Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of Melbourne, Australia. His research interests are on genetic and epigenetic epidemiology of cancers, twin and family research, and cancer risk modelling. His main research projects are on developments of comprehensive risk models for breast cancer, investigations on the relationships of DNA methylation and health-related exposures, and applications of twin and family designs for causation assessment.BMC Medicine, which involves working closely with our in-house editors to ensure that all manuscripts are subject to the same editorial standards and journal policies. Editorial Board Members (EBMs) handle manuscripts within their areas of expertise and oversee aspects of the peer review process from submission to acceptance.Drs. Quaife and Li are both recent members of the editorial board scheme for MQ: I really believe in the journal’s mission to make high quality research available open access. I previously had really good experiences with the journal as an author, both successful and unsuccessful - though the latter was still productive. I find it quite rewarding trying to contribute to the same robust but professional and friendly communication with authors about their manuscripts, and it’s incredibly satisfying when a paper you have managed through the system is finally published.SL: I think the most rewarding experience is that I get a deeper understanding the editorial process of the submitted manuscripts. A manuscript needs to fit the scope and pass the threshold in order to sent out for external review – the first step for getting published. It was interesting to learn about this process.MQ: I was previously on the editorial board of a different journal which published slightly less influential work, so the switch to thinking through whether submissions are of excellent scientific quality and policy relevance has been an interesting one. Not just assessing if manuscripts merit publication somewhere, but publication here. Otherwise all surprises have been very quickly mitigated by the excellent support we receive from the rest of the editorial team.SL: I was impressed by the scope and threshold of the journal. The journal covers all topics related to medicine and has a very inclusive topic selection. The editorial team knows well about the research field of the manuscripts I handled and similar publications, so they can always give critical assessments to the submissions. They have a high threshold on the quality of papers to be published.MQ: Finding reviewers! Particularly during the pandemic, it’s been such a busy time for infectious disease modellers and economists that when an interesting – COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 – paper appears, it has proven quite tricky to find people with enough time to review to the right level.SL: I find the most challenging thing is to find suitable reviewers quickly. I am familiar with the research field of the manuscripts I handled, so for some manuscripts I know who would give a good review; however, the potential reviewers that come to mind initially may have conflicts of interest with the authors, or are too busy to review. Sometimes I need to invite many reviewers with the help of the editorial team to get enough agreed reviewers, and sometimes the process takes a long time.MQ: Initially I found this quite daunting considering papers which had a different disease focus from my work, or using methods slightly outside of those I use on a daily basis. Here I have benefitted from input from my editorial colleagues who are able to give initial opinions based on similar papers which have come across BMC Medicine’s desk, or have been published elsewhere. We also have a wonderful network of peer reviewers, who give incredibly valuable and insightful comments on manuscripts. If in doubt, I am always inclined to reach out to reviewers for their input.SL: Fortunately, the manuscripts I have handled are all within my research focus, so I have not had the experience mentioned in the question yet. However, if that happens in the future, I think I will firstly read some publications to get myself familiar with relevant research field, and try to manage the manuscripts with the help of the editorial team. If I feel it’s not easy to do this, I would feel comfortable to discuss this with the editorial team, and ask them to find a more suitable member to handle.MQ: It’s been really valuable seeing the other side of the process. The things which editors look for in a potentially influential manuscript aren’t necessarily the things that I was focusing on when writing papers, and I have really learnt the importance of a good abstract! No longer is it the thing I write last, just before pressing submit…SL: I think I have learned two major things. The first thing is that the in-house editorial team has their own threshold for the manuscripts they are interested in publishing. The threshold depends on many factors, such as the quality and topic of the study, and the potential impact of the study. The second thing is that the peer review process can sometimes take very long time, especially when there are delays in finding suitable reviewers and reviewers returning their comments. The editors are unwilling to see this delay as well, and they are working hard and try their best to speed up. So as a researcher understanding this process, and understanding the issues in sending across timely and helpful reviews to the authors has been helpful.


The LSID for this publication is: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B0ABE4D9-579F-4E40-B4B6-AB396B41F409. The electronic edition of this work was published in a journal with an ISSN, and has been archived and is available from the following digital repository: PubMed Central.In the Systemic Taxonomy section there is a subsection missing. The subsection should be titled Nomenclatural acts and should come after the Remarks subsection. The Nomenclatural acts subsection should read as follows: The electronic edition of this article conforms to the requirements of the amended International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, and hence the new name contained herein is available under that Code from the electronic edition of this article. This published work and the nomenclatural act it contains have been registered in ZooBank, the online registration system for the ICZN. The ZooBank LSIDs (Life Science Identifiers) can be resolved and the associated information viewed through any standard web browser by appending the LSID alphanumeric component to the prefix “Trilobatus Spezzaferri, Kucera, Pearson, Wade, Rappo, Poole, Morard and Stalder new genus. There should be a line immediately under this title that reads as follows: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0D088398-B3AB-40CE-9011-0B8B7D977D2DThere is information missing from the section Genus


Tomography was launched in 2015 and has published international and multidisciplinary research on all aspects of imaging science, spanning from basic research to clinical trials. Tomography was published by Grapho Publications [ications , who lauTomography has published research about technical advances in hardware, software, and imaging informatics. Tomography is a unique publication venue that allows investigators to communicate integrated findings related to heterogeneous features associated with anatomical, physiological, functional, metabolic, and molecular genetic activities of normal and diseased tissue. Tomography will continue to publish papers involving content, space, and time-dependent analysis of multidimensional information. This will enable multivariate computational data extraction to identify select features of pathologic tissue phenotypes and advance imaging applications in basic science and clinical care.Alongside chemical and molecular probe advances, Tomography, as it complements very well the portfolio of MDPI journals [Journal of Imaging [Radiation [We are delighted to take over the publication of journals , provide Imaging  or Radiaadiation , and strMDPI will publish four quarterly issues as of 2021.Tomography!Looking forward to publishing your research work in


JAAD International not only a reality but a success. I would also like to acknowledge the energetic and tireless support of the team at JAAD (led by Dirk Elston and Jane Grant-Kels), the Academy, and Elsevier. Indeed, no one could have foretold that such a dramatic success and such a meteoric rise would have been possible, and certainly, to have experienced such growth and support in the context of a pandemic is all the more remarkable.As the Journal approaches the 1-year anniversary of its first published issue, I would like to thank the many editorial board members, contributors, and reviewers who have helped make JAAD International but every other scientific journal as well. Reviewers work anonymously and tirelessly, and they take time from their own busy careers to vet the work of others and provide words of support, advice, and criticism. Our reviewers agree to donate their own valuable time and energy to help the scientific enterprise, and some of our most prolific reviewers accept requests to review on a shockingly frequent basis.Although no journal can exist without submissions, no high-quality journal can exist without excellent reviewers. As such, it is worth highlighting the critical role played by reviewers in the success of not just JAAD International, reviewers with experience in epidemiology, study design, and biostatistics are often called on to make important contributions. The most important qualification, however, is a willingness—and even an eagerness—to engage with the scientific community, read closely, and provide honest input.What makes a great reviewer? Subject matter expertise can be critical; however, particularly with the rise of indexing systems, many outstanding reviewers are also generalists, with a wide breadth of knowledge and a keen eye for detail. Given the clinical focus of As the demands on our time only continue to increase, it can be difficult to prioritize reviewing—an unpaid, thankless, and time-consuming endeavor. Yet reviewing is also in some ways the most prosocial act that we can perform as physicians and scientists, and in its anonymity, there is also the opportunity to do the right thing to advance our field forward.JAAD journals, I am always happy to provide feedback to reviewers on request; just as reviewing is a prosocial act, so is the mentorship that can sometimes be helpful in taking a reviewer from good to great—or from great to world-class.Reviewing also provides an opportunity for mentorship, both formal and informal. In addition to the existing mentorship programs available through the Reviewing articles—and particularly reviewing articles well—forces the reviewer to read closely, pause, and consider the larger questions at hand. As such, this yields reviewers who are better readers and writers of the scientific literature.I encourage all of our readers to consider joining our outstanding team of reviewers. There can be no peer review without peers who review. Thank you again!None disclosed.