Taking the mystery out of choosing a journal for publishing your manuscript
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46542/pe.2022.224.7988Keywords:
Academia, Journal metric, Journal selection, Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical science, PublishingAbstract
Determining the most appropriate journal for manuscript submission for pharmacy and pharmaceutical science researchers can be difficult for young and experienced faculty alike and may be the most crucial step to promote successful publication. Although journals are ranked using traditional citation metrics such as the journal impact factor (JIF) and more novel altmetrics, researchers need to consider and prioritise various factors, such as the journal’s aims and scope, intended audience members, and ease of access to promote readership and further studies. Authors also need to be mindful of predatory journals, realistic expectations for acceptance and rejection, as well as promotion and tenure guidelines. The purpose of this article is to give direction and provide resources for academic pharmacists and pharmaceutical scientists around the world on how to select an appropriate journal for their work to promote a successful publication experience.
References
Ayaz, S., & Masood, N. (2020). Comparison of researchers' impact indices. PLoS ONE, 15(5), e0233765. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233765
Cagan, R. (2013). The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. Disease Models & Mechanisms, 6(4), 869-870. https://doi.org/10.1242/dmm.012955
Cech, T. R., Eddy, S. R., Eisenberg, D., Hersey, K., Holtzman, S. H., Poste, G. H., Raikhel, N. V., Scheller, R. H., Singer, D. B., Waltham, M. C., National Academics Committee on Responsibilities of Authorship in the Biological, S. (2003). Sharing publication-related data and materials: responsibilities of authorship in the life sciences. Plant Physiology, 132(1), 19-24. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.900068
Garcia-Villar, C. (2021). A critical review on altmetrics: can we measure the social impact factor? Insights Imaging, 12(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01033-2
Grudniewicz, A., Moher, D., & Cobey, K. D. (2019). Predatory journals: no definition, no defence. Nature, 576, 210-212. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Huisman, J., & Smits, J. (2017). Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author's perspective. Scientometrics, 113(1), 633-650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5
Kaptay, G. (2020). The k-index is introduced to replace the h-index to evaluate better the scientific excellence of individuals. Heliyon, 6(7), e04415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04415
Katritsis, D. (2019). Journal Impact Factor: Widely Used, Misused and Abused. Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology, 8(3), 153-155. https://doi.org/10.15420/aer.2019.8.3.FO1
Khadilkar, S. S. (2018). Rejection Blues: Why Do Research Papers Get Rejected? The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 68(4), 239-241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-018-1153-1
Kinouchi, O., & Cardoso, G. C. (2018). The K-index and the hubs of science. European Heart Journal, 39(38), 3489-3490. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy613
Paulus, F. M., Cruz, N., & Krach, S. (2018). The Impact Factor Fallacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1487. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01487
Rice, D. B., Raffoul, H., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Moher, D. (2020). Academic criteria for promotion and tenure in biomedical sciences faculties: cross sectional analysis of international sample of universities. BMJ, 369, m2081. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2081
Shokraneh, F., Ilghami, R., Masoomi, R., & Amanollahi, A. (2012). How to select a journal to submit and publish your biomedical paper? Bioimpacts, 2(1), 61-68. https://doi.org/10.5681/bi.2012.008
