Re: Journal Standards - Editor's reply.

Abstract

Dr Jackson's concerns about citing non-peer-reviewed studies in the New Zealand Veterinary Journal (NZVJ) are shared by the editors and Editorial Board and have provoked considerable discussion about our policy and practice in this regard. Independent peer review remains a central part of the quality control process applied to the publication of scientific literature and is embraced by the NZVJ. All papers published in the NZVJ are scrutinised by the editors and Editorial Board, and those considered suitable are sent to two or three expert referees. In 2002, these comprised 195 people, of whom 36% were resident overseas. In addition, each paper is allocated a Guardian, a member of the Editorial Board specifically responsible for ensuring the adequacy of the peer-review process and providing an additional perspective regarding the quality of the paper. Papers are only accepted for publication after authors have satisfactorily addressed the issues raised by referees, Guardians and the Editor and sometimes by the Editorial Board. Thus, in addition to peer review, key quality-control roles are exercised at multiple points in the publication process by the Editor and Editorial Board to ensure the effectiveness, impartiality and integrity of the peer-review and editorial processes. Citation of data published in non-peer-reviewed sources in the NZVJ is discouraged but not precluded, in recognition of publications such as Surveillance and annual conference proceedings of New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA) special interest branches and the New Zealand Society of Animal Production as first repositories of disease reports and trial data often of substantial value and relevance to the scientific community. Many do not progress into the peer reviewed literature for reasons other than lack of quality and would otherwise be very difficult to access. As Dr Jackson points out, a substantial body of data generated in the deer industry has not yet appeared in peer-reviewed scientific journals, yet circulates widely in that industry. Considerable discussion preceded the permission granted authors to cite non-peer-reviewed studies to the extent evident in the December 2002 issue which was dedicated to feature review articles on the health and welfare of farmed deer. The proceedings of the annual seminars of the Deer Branch of the NZVA contain one of the most comprehensive records of studies on the nutrition, health and welfare of farmed deer available in the world. It was considered that the benefits of including discussion of these studies and exposing them to critical review outweighed the risks elaborated by Dr Jackson. However, the concerns raised by Dr Jackson and others prompted the Editorial Board to review the NZVJ's policy in this regard, which is now as follows: - Authors are specifically encouraged to cite peer-reviewed references wherever possible and particularly discouraged from citing their own publications in non-peer-reviewed sources. - Referees are specifically requested to scrutinise the use of non peer-reviewed references and make recommendations regarding alternatives or omission. - The Editor requests that authors: justify the use of non-peer-reviewed references; avoid the use of non-peer-reviewed citations more than 2 years old and; clearly distinguish references to nonpeer-reviewed references in the text of their papers, using qualifying statements such as preliminary data or non-peer-reviewed reportsetc. By limiting but not precluding citation of non-peer-reviewed studies, exposing them to specific scrutiny during the peer-review and editorial processes and by distinguishing them from peer-reviewed sources in the body of articles we aim to minimise the dangers of appearing to legitimise non-peer-reviewed data without losing the information value contained in some of these reports. There are many benefits of publishing in quality peer-reviewed journals such as the NZVJ, not least of which is the almost inevitable improvement in the quality and rigour of manuscripts after peer-review and the greatly increased opportunity for recognition and citation of peer-reviewed studies by others. Peer-reviewed journals remain the most widely accepted and established medium for communication and preservation of high-quality science. Authors and industry sectors that choose not to publish in peer-reviewed journals arguably limit the recognition and true progress of their science.