Laboratory Investigation web focus on China.

The vast growth of China's publishing output is a reflection of the increasing strength of Chinese science. The editors of Laboratory Investigation (LI) present a collection of papers that showcases research by authors from institutions across China, highlighting the significant contributions of Chinese scientists to the journal.

Finding a new generation of spies and manuscript reviewers.

This material was presented as a poster at the Seventh International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, 8-10 September 2013, Chicago, IL, USA.

The publishing game: reflections of an editorial team.

The close of a 5-year editorship gives opportunity to reflect on the highs and the lows of an editorship. The goal of such reflection is to assist both authors and reviewers in interacting with a biomedical journal, and to foster interest among individuals contemplating an editorship. Among the highs was the privilege of publishing high-quality original scientific work within the scope of the journal; in this instance mechanistic studies of disease. Although review articles and editorials have their reward, it is the publication of original peer-reviewed work that constitutes the true basis for advancing biomedical science. This is the heart of journal publication. Second, the editorial interaction with submitting authors in bringing their work to publication is itself highly rewarding, and can lead to longer-term collegial working relationships between editors and authors. The anonymous expert reviewers also play a key role in bringing outstanding scientific work to successful publication. Collectively, authors, editors, and reviewers constitute an important 'community of science'. Third, working together as an editorial team, especially through the weekly 'journal clubs' that a regular editorial meeting affords, is commended as a key reward of any editorial group taking on journal management. The lows included sifting through submitted manuscripts in which the rigor of science was not satisfactory, and encountering specific instances of compromised scientific integrity--fortunately rare. In both instances, the editorial commitment is to publish high-quality original science; a necessary corollary is identifying those submissions, through rigorous but fair review, which do not meet journal standards. In the end, editorship is a highly rewarding experience, and very much conducive to sustaining the wonder of science that drew us to this profession.

The impact of review articles.

The expansion of the scientific literature has produced a concomitant increase in the number of review articles. One may posit that the sheer number of review articles belies their function. This study examines the growth of the review literature, what types of journals publish these papers, and provides data on the citation rate of the review literature. Focus is given to the pathology literature, defined as papers that have the word 'pathology' or its derivatives in the title, abstract or as a key word. The pathology literature is proliferating at a rapid rate; from 1991 to 2006, the total number of original articles increased 2.3-fold, while the number of reviews increased 5.6-fold. Furthermore, in that same time frame, approximately 90% of pathology articles and reviews were not published in pathology journals. An examination of the 538 review articles that were published in pathology journals in 2005 reveals that only 21% of them have been cited more than 10 times since their publication. The impact factors of 12 pathology journals were compared with and without review articles for the period 2000-2006, including The American Journal of Pathology (AJP), The Journal of Pathology (JP) and Laboratory Investigation (LI). Inclusion of reviews increased the impact factor for JP by 0.610+/-0.153 U (+/-s.d.), which was significantly greater than that for AJP (0.109+/-0.086) and LI (0.147+/-0.088). However, for all three journals the total impact factor was largely a reflection of the citations of original articles. The motivations of authors and editors who produce review articles are considered, such as career progress and increasing journal visibility, respectively. The fact that many review articles are poorly cited raises concern about the harm that poor review articles can cause, first by making it more difficult to find the good reviews, and in the worst case by propagating scientific error through lack of critical appraisal of original research. The attributes of the best reviews that serve to shape the future of science are described. These data are presented with the hope that authors and editors will carefully consider their respective roles in ensuring that the body of review literature will be of maximum benefit to the scientific and biomedical community.

p37 Induces tumor invasiveness.

Previous studies have shown a statistically significant correlation between human carcinomas and monoclonal antibody detection of a Mycoplasma hyorhinis-encoded protein known as p37. A potential mechanism of p37 is that it might promote invasion and metastasis. Recombinant p37 enhanced the invasiveness of two prostate carcinoma and two melanoma cell lines in a dose-dependent manner in vitro, but did not have a significant effect on tumor cell growth. Furthermore, the increased binding to cell surfaces and the enhanced invasive potential of cancer cells from exposure to p37 could be completely reversed by preincubation of the cancer cells with an anti-p37 monoclonal antibody. Sequence comparisons, followed by three-dimensional molecular modeling, revealed a region of similarity between p37 and influenza hemagglutinin A, a sialic acid-binding protein that plays a critical role in viral entry. Binding of p37 to prostate carcinoma cells was found to be at least partially sialic acid dependent because neuraminidase treatment decreased this binding. Taken together, these observations suggest that M. hyorhinis can infect humans and may facilitate tumor invasiveness via p37. These results further suggest that p37 may be a molecular target for cancer therapy.

The proper use of citation data in journal management.

Journal impact factors (IF) are often maligned in editorials found in scientific publications, yet citation data can be used appropriately in journal management. The editors of Laboratory Investigation have found that weekly tracking of citation data for this and other highly ranked pathology journals provides valuable feedback on editorial performance and enables us to predict accurate IFs at least six months in advance. Once the IFs are released, it is useful to quantify the contributions of specific article categories, such as reviews and research articles, to the official IFs. In an ongoing attempt to understand the relationship between article downloads and eventual citations, we also analyze the citation rate of papers that had previously been the most frequently accessed on our web site. Finally, as a measure of editorial judgment, the papers that contributed no citations to the journal's IF are examined as are the papers that were rejected by Laboratory Investigation (Lab. Invest.) but subsequently published elsewhere. Thus the editors of Lab. Invest. use citation data in several ways to measure our progress in elevating the quality of the journal and understand the citation dynamics of papers we publish, while remaining true to the journal's fundamental operating premise: publish high-quality original work relating to the mechanisms of disease.

Predicting impact factor one year in advance.

The first impact factor (IF) to reflect the sole efforts of a new editorial team occurs 4 years into what is usually a 5-year editorship, owing to the lag times of: paper accrual and publication, accumulation of citations in derivative literature, and compiling of such citations by the Thomson ISI Web of Knowledge service. Through weekly collection of citation data from the Web of Science over the past 2 years, we now demonstrate that the evolution of IF can be tracked weekly over the course of a calendar year, enabling prediction of the next year's IF beginning at the middle of the previous year. The methodology used to track the developing IF for Lab Invest is presented in this study and a prediction made for the 2006 IF, along with IF predictions for other general pathology journals (American Journal of Pathology, Journal of Pathology, Modern Pathology, American Journal of Surgical Pathology, and Human Pathology). Despite the fact that the 2006 IF for Lab Invest will not be issued until June 2007, it became apparent as early as July 2006 that the Lab Invest IF would be greatly improved over 2004 and 2005 by a predicted 0.5 units. However, as important as IF can be to a journal, it is vital not to let IF considerations influence every aspect of the editors' decisions. Rather, the significance of early prediction lies in earlier validation of editorial policies for journal management as a whole, and reassurance that the philosophy for journal operations is on track.