Peer review crisis

[Aishana Joshi]

Dear all,

Seems like we are running out of peer reviewers. Nobody seems to be willing to review the papers we have been sending for "some unknown endemic reason". This might be signifying us for the potential need to pay our reviewers in the days ahead. But will paying only help is another major question?

We have two new submissions from Dr. Sunil Raja Manandhar from KMC and Dr. Ravinder Kumar from Rajasthan. I have labelled Dr. SRM's article under me. Could Aditi/ Kshitiz kindly look into the other one? 

Attached herewith is Dr. Tseten's article on CLD. Seems like the article is written in haste. It  looked more like a newspaper article to me than a journal article with the use of inappropriate terminologies at several instances.

Please kindly review the article. 

Thanks,

Aishana

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Dear Aishana

I agree this is an poor article, written mainly for promotion and to advocate LT, I mean, liver transplantation.

While communicating with the author, please mention:

1. The article appears to be written to serve two purposes: disseminate a 'research' finding and advocate for liver transplantation in Nepal. The second objective (advocate for liver transplantation in Nepal) has somehow dominated the whole article and overshadowed the research component. A ' personal viewpoint' would be a better medium to advocate for liver transplantation in Nepal.

2. The research component has got a lot of fallacies, and shall need to be thoroughly revised. Please follow the basics and JKMC guidelines before re-submission. Issues such as titles of tables are A,B, Cs of any medical writing. The author must also have basic knowledge when using the epidemiological terms such as 'prevalence', etc.

Some additional comments in the attached file, Aishana, with a pseudonym JKMC-Edit. 

Regards

Abhinav

--

Abhinav Vaidya MBBS MD PhD
Associate Professor of Community Medicine

Cardiovascular Health Epidemiology and Promotion Consultant

Dept. of Community Medicine

Kathmandu Medical College, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Tel: 0977-1-4469064 Ext. 3502 

Fax: 0977-1-4477920,
P.O.Box:21266
 
 
Mobile: 977-9841484422 
Emails:
dr.abhi...@gmail.com

abhinav...@gu.se

[Aishana Joshi]

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your comments and review. I will correspond with the author as per your guidance.

Thanks,

Aishana

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Dear Aishana

In view of the delay and all, let us finalize the papers on our own
for the 11th issue. We'll try to solve the peer-review problem but it
cannot be done immediately. So, let's re-look at the papers we have
selected for the 11th issue, divide among us and proceed. If we can
send to press immediately after Dashain that would be good.

Regards
av

On 19/10/2015, Aishana Joshi <aishan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> Thank you for your comments and review. I will correspond with the author
> as per your guidance.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Aishana
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Abhinav Vaidya
> <dr.abhi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Aishana
>>
>> I agree this is an poor article, written mainly for promotion and to
>> advocate LT, I mean, liver transplantation.
>>
>> While communicating with the author, please mention:
>>

>> *1. The article appears to be written to serve two purposes: disseminate

>> a
>> 'research' finding and advocate for liver transplantation in Nepal. The
>> second objective (advocate for liver transplantation in Nepal) has
>> somehow
>> dominated the whole article and overshadowed the research component. A '
>> personal viewpoint' would be a better medium to advocate for liver

>> transplantation in Nepal.*
>>
>> *2. The research component has got a lot of fallacies, and shall need to

>> be thoroughly revised. Please follow the basics and JKMC guidelines
>> before
>> re-submission. Issues such as titles of tables are A,B, Cs of any medical
>> writing. The author must also have basic knowledge when using the

>> epidemiological terms such as 'prevalence', etc.*

[Aishana Joshi]

Dear all,

Please kindly share the status of the articles you are looking into for the 11th issue. There has been a massive delay already. Lets all expedite the process.

Regarding my articles:

Dr. Robin Joshi: this article relies on our inhouse decision as how/why it should/should not be published?

Dr. Tanka Bohara: sent to Dr. Arbin Joshi for peer review. We haven't received any reply so far. What should be done with this?

Dr. Usha Karki: after several rejections from reviewers, finally we have Dr. Pramila Pradhan who has agreed to review this paper. We received her reply after almost 10 days of our last email to her. So, considering the already imposed delay the reviewing process might take longer. So, what do we do?

Thanks,

Aishana

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Dear Aishana

I am at my pessimistic best right now. With indifference and non-communication from most of us, we are heading towards an end. The end of JKMC is inevitable.

Thanks.

Regards

Abhinav

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Dear all,

Please kindly share the status of the articles you are looking into for the 11th issue. There has been a massive delay already. Lets all expedite the process.

Regarding my articles:

Dr. Robin Joshi: this article relies on our inhouse decision as how/why it should/should not be published?

AV: I will look at the article and return to you.

Dr. Tanka Bohara: sent to Dr. Arbin Joshi for peer review. We haven't received any reply so far. What should be done with this?

AV: Please send him a reminder. I'll also drop him a line. In fact, I've just done that.

Dr. Usha Karki: after several rejections from reviewers, finally we have Dr. Pramila Pradhan who has agreed to review this paper. We received her reply after almost 10 days of our last email to her. So, considering the already imposed delay the reviewing process might take longer. So, what do we do?

AV: What was her reply 10 days back?

Thanks,

Aishana

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Aishana, has the Tseten article sent back to her?

av

[Pradeep Shrestha]

We are in real bad state now. I agree with Abhinav sir that we should now proceed with in-house decision of articles for 11th issue. Lets all meet and decide on the issue. Will Friday be suitable for all?

The article under my label and being considered for 11th issue is stuck with author. We now have to proceed with whatever is on hand.

Hope to meet on Friday.

Thank you!
Pradeep.

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Pradeep, I am available only up to 11 on Friday. If we can meet, say at 10, then it is okay for me.

thanks

av

[Pradeep Shrestha]

10 am okay for me sir! Lets hear from all..

[Aishana Joshi]

Sir,

I wont be available from 10 to 3 on Friday because it's my office time. Any other time if possible ??

I just had a talk with Dr. Arbin joshi regarding the article(Dr. Tanka's article) we had sent him for peer review. He said he hadn't received the full text and was asking me to resend it. But we had sent the full text to him on 7th October and its there in our sent mail list. I was wondering if anything went wrong with our mail delivery. Nevertheless, I have requested him to expedite the review process and to send us his feedback at the earliest possible.

I'll send Dr. Tseten's article back to her tonight.

Thanks,

Aishana

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Aishana

Just send it by your personal mail for the time being. 

av

[Nira]

Ok , let's meet at 10  am if ok with everyone.

[Aditi Agrawal]

Dear all,
I understand the immense need to sit together and discuss about our current situation. However, tomorrow Kshitiz and I might not be able to attend the meeting as there is a conference on neurosurgery starting tomorrow and we registered for it months ago. 

I will send you all an update on the status of articles i am looking into in a short while. 

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Warm regards,

Aditi 

[Aditi Agrawal]

Dear All,

Attached below is the description of the status of articles I have been assigned to look in to. 

Issue 11:
	Code	Author	Status
	150227ASC04CR	Sandhya Chapagain	Sent to author after peer review- awaiting response from author
	150321LR04RA	Rajesh Lakhey	Sent to author after further corrections in his resubmitted work- awaiting response from the author
	150329PM04OA	Manijeh Pirdel	Has been peer reviewed- to be sent to the author to make changes accordingly
Others:
	Code	Author	Status
	150127PH01OA	Hom Pant	Has undergone initial editing
	150413PSM01OA	Saraswati Padhye	Second re-submission made. To be corrected further
	150801SK04OA	Kiran Shakya	Suitable peer reviewer still not found

I will update our spreadsheets accordingly as well.

Warm Regards,

Aditi 

[Abhinav Vaidya]

Aditi 

Dr Purnima R Sthapit from Dhulikhel had agreed to peer- review it which I had communicated to you. What happened to it?

Thanks

av

[Abhinav Vaidya]

KNOCK KNOCK! Aditi!! 

The mail that I wrote to you three days back is still awaiting response! 

I wanted to know if you wrote to Dr Purnima R Sthapit from Dhulikhel for peer-reviewing and if she had agreed to peer- review it.

I request you to reply.

Thank you.

Abhinav