|
|
| Year : 2009 | Volume
: 3
| Issue : 1 | Page : 1-3 |
|
| Let's analyze the year passed |
|
|
VB Gupta
C/O B R Nahata College of Pharmacy, Mhow-Neemuch Road, Mandsaur (M.P.) - 458001,
Click here for correspondence address and email
|
|
 |
|
How to cite this article:
Gupta V B. Let's analyze the year passed. Asian J Pharm 2009;3:1-3 |
While we move ahead with the year 2009, let's devote some time analyzing the year ended. This stock-taking is prudent to all the stakeholders of AJP, particularly, as AJP still does not enjoy impact factor ratings.
The year of AJP's inception - 2007 - was full of teething troubles, and it's in the year of 2008 that the journal entered into systematic growth phase. I am delighted to share the success of AJP with all its stakeholders, most importantly, the readers, the authors, and the reviewers. As 'editorial board' we find our role that of facilitator between 'authors' and 'reviewers', between whom, the actual transaction takes place.
 Top 10 0 Tally | |  |
[Table 1] provides the top 10 tally for the year 2008 with Bhandari et al 's review article on orodispersible tablets occupying the first place followed by Wagh et al 's review on polymers for ocular preparations. Subsequent to these two reviews the remaining tally is dominated by research articles fiercely leveraging their positions. Presence of large number of research articles in the top 10 tally is an indicator of the quality and utility of the researches published by the journal.
| Acceptance / Rejection Rate | | |
Rejection rate of any journal indicates its popularity. While in 2007 most of the articles were invited, 2008 had high submissions of 199 articles leading to the rejection rate of 81% [Table 2]. Although we could have been more generous by accepting a few more articles, constrains of time and money compelled us to decide otherwise. Let the rising rejections make published researchers feel distinct, without disheartening young researchers submitting the research for the first time.
| Journal Performance | | |
It's every researcher's desire to get published as early as possible, which is in the interest of other stakeholders too, as due to rapid knowledge explosion the researches start diminishing their value with time. We, at the editorial office, try to reduce the cycle time as much as possible; still the peer-reviewing process takes its own time. How did we measure in 2008 on this aspect, is shown in [Table 3]. The time taken from 'first submission' to 'acceptance' is still very high. Our onus in 2009 would be to reduce this time.
| Authors | | |
AJP succeeded in attracting a large number of authors in 2008 [Table 4]. Although most of the contributions are still from India, the journal is spreading its wings in other countries and has started attracting overseas contributions.
| Reviewers | | |
This is the front where the journal succeeded the most, 473 referees from 49 countries generously contributed in peer reviewing. Because of this rigorous involvement of reviewers, it's almost certain that whatever AJP published, carried high quality; and hence, the authors should feel pride in having passed this test. [Table 5] represents the reviewers' performance and [Table 6] represents country-wise distribution of the manuscript review.
Amidst the global recession, hoping that the AJP will not require any contraction.
Correspondence Address:
V B Gupta
C/O B R Nahata College of Pharmacy, Mhow-Neemuch Road, Mandsaur (M.P.) - 458001
DOI: 10.4103/0973-8398.49165
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
