Situational study of seven Latin-American pulmonology journals.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the situation of pulmonology journals published in Latin America. METHODS: A survey was conducted in a meeting sponsored by the Latin American Thoracic Society. Each journal editor presented a report and answered a questionnaire. RESULTS: Improving information acquisition is the main motivation for pulmonology societies to edit their own journals, whereas disseminating medical knowledge and reporting experiences are the main motivations for authors to submit papers. The most common failing in the manuscripts submitted is poor compliance with the journal guidelines. Improving author-editor-reviewer relationships would be the best strategy for improving the quality of manuscripts. Suggestions for improving Latin American journals included the following: promoting professionalism in editorial tasks; encouraging manuscript reviewers to be more meticulous; and embracing international norms for editing medical journals. The following major problems were reported: a lack of regular, appropriate periodicity of issues; a shortage of original papers that are considered 'milestones' in the specialty; a low rejection rate for submitted papers; a high turnover of editors. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, we can make the following recommendations: although many journals are available in electronic form, they should also be maintained in print form; each journal should divulge its subscription fee, even if it is included in the annual society membership dues; although each Latin American country might decide to publish its own pulmonology journal, the feasibility of publishing a multinational Latin American pulmonology journal should be explored.

Estudio situacional de siete revistas latinoamericanas de neumología / Situational study of seven Latin-American pulmonology journals

OBJETIVO: Caracterizar la situación de las revistas de neumología publicadas en Latinoamérica. MÉTODOS: Fue realizada una encuesta en reunión organizada por la Sociedad Latinoamericana de Tórax. Cada editor presentó un reporte y respondió a un cuestionario. RESULTADOS: Mejora en la adquisición de informaciones es la principal motivación para las sociedades de neumología para la edición de sus propias revistas, considerando que la diseminación de conocimiento médico y el reporte de experiencias son los principales motivos para que los autores envíen sus trabajos. El error más común en los trabajos enviados es la poca conformidad con las directrices de la revista. Mejorar las relaciones entre autor, editor y revisor sería la mejor estrategia para perfeccionar la calidad de los textos. Algunas sugerencias para mejorar las revistas latinoamericanas: promover profesionales en tareas editoriales; encorajar a los revisores a que sean más meticulosos; y adoptar normas internacionales para la edición de revistas médicas. Fueron reportados los siguientes problemas: falta de periodicidad adecuada y regular de las ediciones; una disminución en la cantidad de trabajos originales que son considerados ejemplares en la especialidad; baja tasa de rechazo de trabajos enviados; alta rotación de editores. CONCLUSION: Podemos hacer las siguientes recomendaciones: a pesar de varias revistas estar en formato electrónico, ellas también deben ser mantenidas en formato impreso; cada revista debe informar su tasa de suscripción, aunque esté incluida en los gastos de inscripción anual; a pesar de cada país de Latinoamérica poder optar por publicar su propia revista, la posibilidad de publicación de una revista multinacional de neumología latinoamericana debe ser explotada.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the situation of pulmonology journals published in Latin America. METHODS: A survey was conducted in a meeting sponsored by the Latin American Thoracic Society. Each journal editor presented a report and answered a questionnaire. RESULTS: Improving information acquisition is the main motivation for pulmonology societies to edit their own journals, whereas disseminating medical knowledge and reporting experiences are the main motivations for authors to submit papers. The most common failing in the manuscripts submitted is poor compliance with the journal guidelines. Improving author-editor-reviewer relationships would be the best strategy for improving the quality of manuscripts. Suggestions for improving Latin American journals included the following: promoting professionalism in editorial tasks; encouraging manuscript reviewers to be more meticulous; and embracing international norms for editing medical journals. The following major problems were reported: a lack of regular, appropriate periodicity of issues; a shortage of original papers that are considered 'milestones' in the specialty; a low rejection rate for submitted papers; a high turnover of editors. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, we can make the following recommendations: although many journals are available in electronic form, they should also be maintained in print form; each journal should divulge its subscription fee, even if it is included in the annual society membership dues; although each Latin American country might decide to publish its own pulmonology journal, the feasibility of publishing a multinational Latin American pulmonology journal should be explored.