The “Editor's page” is the medium through which the editorial team of Revista Española de Cardiología (Rev Esp Cardiol) reviews the journal's overall activity during the last year, in addition to communicating novelties and future plans. This year will be the sixth “Editor's page” drafted by this editor and his editorial team, and the last. The past 6 years have been dizzying and fascinating for the entire team. We have strived to maintain and even increase the scientific quality of Rev Esp Cardiol while improving its dissemination and consolidating its visibility in the group of cardiovascular journals with the greatest impact. In the following pages, we present a brief but broad overview of the events of these 6 years for Rev Esp Cardiol in all their facets and critically evaluate whether the editorial team has achieved the goals laid out in 2015. In addition, we describe how the transition to the new team will be conducted.

The challenge raised by this “Editor's page” is by no mean small. As well as being the last such article, the previous year has truly been anomalous. The tsunami represented by the COVID-19 pandemic will not be easily forgotten. The last few months have tested us, both individually and as a group. We have had to turn our respective roles upside down and inside out to adapt to the new situation, all in a record time. The circumstances have also affected Rev Esp Cardiol, whose editorial office has made every effort to deal with a considerable amount of extra scientific material, as discussed below.

Our most loyal readers will notice that some of the figures presented in this section and the next differ slightly from those of previous years. This is due to a change in the method used to extract and analyze the data. From this year, we have decided to report the information on article reception and decisions taken during each calendar year (we previously indicated the editorial decisions regarding articles received in the calendar year, which invariably meant that, at publication of the “Editor's page”, some articles received in the previous year were awaiting a final decision). As a consequence of this new policy, the data presented are definitive, although it must be remembered that the article reception and decision figures are not fully comparable, given that decisions were made on some articles in a subsequent period.

Figure 1 shows the number of manuscripts received by Rev Esp Cardiol in almost the entire period of this editorial team. As can be seen, despite annual variations, the demand for publication was stable at between 950 and 1150 manuscripts per year and grew markedly in the last year. Indeed, a historic high was reached in 2020 with 1263 manuscripts received. If we, for example, compare this number with the volume at the end of the previous decade (2010; 712 manuscripts received), we see a greater than 75% increase. If we refer exclusively to submission of original articles (figure 2), 2020 marked a new historic record, with 529 original articles received, almost 30% higher than the previous high in 2016. Although we had already detected a considerable increase in original articles received in 2019, the most important factor underlying this sudden increase has been the submission of manuscripts related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Figure 3 shows the demand for the publication of articles related to this topic between March and December, which traces a curve very similar to that of the epidemiology. Readers may be able to envision the workload that this has represented for the editorial office, whose members must be thanked deeply for their effort. The other journals in the REC Publications group have also responded to this situation, publishing official material of major interest.1–4

Figure 1.

Evolution of the total numbers of manuscripts received by Rev Esp Cardiol from 2016 to 2020.

(0.06MB).

Figure 2.

Evolution of the total numbers of original articles received by Rev Esp Cardiol from 2016 to 2020.

(0.06MB).

Figure 3.

Number of manuscripts concerning COVID-19 received for publication by Rev Esp Cardiol between March and December 2020.

(0.06MB).

The increased demand (figure 1 and figure 2), although a barometer of the good health of Rev Esp Cardiol, cannot unfortunately go hand-in-hand with an increase of the same magnitude in the number of articles ultimately published. For example, although the acceptance and rejection rates for original articles have been stable for the last 5 years and more articles of this category were accepted in 2020 than in previous years, the number of original articles rejected increased due to the jump in such articles received (figure 4). This situation has generated a stock of original articles awaiting publication that must be reduced in the mid-term.

Figure 4.

Final editorial decisions concerning original articles taken by Rev Esp Cardiol from 2016 to 2020.

(0.07MB).

Figure 5 shows the number of articles published by type in recent years. Although we have recently opted for a certain stability regarding the numbers of original articles published per issue, we decided to increase the space allowed for these articles in 2021, from 5 to 6 per issue, in order to reduce the stock generated. In addition, original manuscripts rejected for publication by Rev Esp Cardiol can be transferred to either of the other journals of REC Publications. During 2020, a transfer possibility was offered to 170 manuscripts (of these, 130 were original articles). In the same year, slightly more than 15% were transferred to one of the other journals of the REC Publications group and considered for publication. We encourage authors to consider publication of their work in REC: CardioClinics5 and REC: Interventional Cardiology,6 either through direct submission or consideration of a transfer when it is offered.

Figure 5.

Manuscripts published in Rev Esp Cardiol from 2016 to 2020. The datum corresponding to the total for each year includes other types of articles not individually shown in this graph.

(0.11MB).

What can be clearly seen in the last 5 years is a significant decrease in the number of reviews published (whether in the form of review articles or focus articles), particularly in the last 2 years. As already announced in the “Editor's page” of 2020,7 the reason for this decrease was the extraordinary competiveness of this format in the cardiovascular field. Regardless, we have dedicated the space available for this type of article to first-rate manuscripts and we would like to congratulate the authors for the quality of their work.8–18 Any decision regarding the number of reviews to be published by Rev Esp Cardiol in the coming years will be left to the next editorial team. We believe that, regardless of their bibliometric potential, they constitute an excellent educational resource that must continue.

During recent years, the number of scientific letters published has varied significantly, with an increase in the first few years and a marked decrease in the last 2 years. This variation is related to various factors. One reason is the transfer of the publication of the “Advances in cardiology” articles from the scientific letter format in Rev Esp Cardiol to a longer format in a dedicated issue of the journal REC: CardioClinics.19 Independently of this factor, we decided upon a change in the editorial policy that involved a progressive decrease in the number of scientific letters published to avoid suspicion of impact factor distortion, as discussed in the previous “Editor's page”.7

Two specific sections have been introduced during this editorial period, both in 2017. The first is the section “Atrium”,20 a written summary of the issue contents by the Editor-in-Chief. This section continued until December 2020. The second, named “Viaje al corazón de las palabras” (“Into the heart of terminology”),21 is a magnificently written section by Fernando A. Navarro, a member of our Advisory Board, whose aim is to comment entertainingly on the doubts and peculiarities of scientific language.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that, during the last year, a boost has been given to Rev Esp Cardiol Supplements, with a total of 5 published on various topics in 2020.22–26

Once again, we have analyzed the journal's production and publication times, an aspect increasingly more relevant due to the strong competition among journals. On the one hand, we analyzed the times from manuscript submission to the first decision (figure 6) and, on the other, the mean reviewer response times (figure 7). The times required for the editorial process are stable, at less than 3 weeks for original articles, which includes desk rejection. As we have seen during the entire period of this editorial team, our reviewers maintained excellent mean review times (figure 7). Once again, their endeavors deserve our sincere gratitude. We also reiterate our thanks to all of the reviewers who work with Rev Esp Cardiol (table 1), many of them without belonging to our Editorial or Advisory Boards. As always, due to the high standard of their work, the elite reviewers deserve special recognition (table 2).

Figure 6.

Time to first decision (days) and times for reviewers, both overall and exclusively for original articles. OAs, original articles.

(0.1MB).

Figure 7.

Changes in reviewer response times for Rev Esp Cardiol (for first submision of original articles) between 2007 and 2020. Time is expressed in days.

(0.08MB).

As mentioned, the stability of the response times of the reviewers has been one of the constants during this editorial period,7,33–35 as in previous eras. We believe that this is one of the healthiest indices of Rev Esp Cardiol because it likely indirectly indicates that the reviewers feel as if they are a part of Rev Esp Cardiol, which is undoubtedly one of our journal's greatest assets. And although this editorial team and the previous teams have attempted to reward the efforts of the reviewers through various acts (access to the Elsevier Reviewer Recognition Platform,36 granting of training credits, inclusion of elite reviewers in the Editorial Committee, and invitations to write editorials), the reality is that the effort made exceeds any compensation that can be offered by Rev Esp Cardiol.

As in each year, we must discuss the latest published impact factor (IF), that for 2019 (published in the 2020 edition of Journal Citation Reports [JCR]37). There was a slight but clear decrease in the IF in absolute terms to 4.642 (previously, 5.078). However, the decrease is lower in relative terms, that is, if we analyze the relative position of Rev Esp Cardiol vs the other cardiovascular journals indexed. This year, we are placed at number 30 of a total of 138, whereas we were placed at number 27 of a total of 136 in the previous year, both times within the first quartile. In reality, the IF decrease in absolute terms has generally affected most journals and is related to a change made by Clarivate to the bibliometric counting process.38

Figure 8 shows the bibliometric trend for Rev Esp Cardiol in both absolute and relative terms. The most appropriate conclusion is the consolidation of Rev Esp Cardiol from the bibliometric point of view in the last 3 years in the first quartile of cardiovascular journals. Nonetheless, we believe that this situation deserves discussion. Given the variable nature of IFs, reliant on the editorial policy and idiosyncrasies of each journal, we must emphasize the value of an impartial and self-critical consideration of the real “visibility” of Rev Esp Cardiol compared with other cardiovascular journals. This visibility is probably highly correlated with the ability of Rev Esp Cardiol to generate external citations (citations from other journals) for each article published. If we specifically focus on this parameter, Rev Esp Cardiol has consistently been placed in the last 3 years within the 35% of cardiovascular journals with the most external citations generated per article. We consider this to be the best indicator of the visibility of Rev Esp Cardiol. Regardless of the IF ranking of the journal within the first quartile, we believe that this fact, impartial and objective, must be a source of satisfaction for the entire Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC).

Figure 8.

Position of Rev Esp Cardiol among cardiovascular journals (Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems) according to impact factor in Journal Citation Reports.37

(0.1MB).

Given all of the above, it is more than acceptable to highlight the work with the highest dissemination and scientific visibility in recent years. The publications of 2017 and 2018 influence the impact factor for 2018, whereas those published in 2018 and 2019 influence the impact factor for 2020 (which will be published in JCR in 2021); those published in 2020 influence the immediacy index, a reflection of the speed of the scientific visibility of a publication.

Table 3 shows this information,11,39–64 extracted from the Web of Science65 at the start of 2021. As always, the editorial team congratulates the authors of these articles. Finally, as in every year, we must mention and commend the authors of the publications receiving the awards conferred by the SEC based on scientific impact and quality (table 4).

Rev Esp Cardiol is the official scientific publication of the SEC and one of its vehicles of expression. This editorial team began its journey in October 2015 with great enthusiasm and striving for excellence. Undoubtedly, we started out from a privileged position thanks to the excellent work of the previous editorial teams, whom we must praise. We also benefited from the contributions and professionalism of the staff in the editorial office. Eva M. Cardenal, María González Nogal, Helena Gómez-Lobo, and Belén Juan have been, are, and will be key to the publication of a first-rate journal and essential for taking on new challenges. The Editorial Director, Iria del Río, deserves special recognition because her proven commitment and professionalism in the editorial management of Rev Esp Cardiol ensures the high-quality of our journal, with this editorial team and those to come.

During the 6 years of this editorial period, the general working lines have revolved around several principles: a) maintaining the rigor of the editorial process, particularly regarding peer review; b) prioritizing original material, often at the expense of other more official or educational material and while attempting to maintain the difficult but essential balance that ensures all fields of knowledge are represented; c) encouraging the external visibility of Rev Esp Cardiol via international commissioned editorials; d) an almost real-time monitoring of the visibility of Rev Esp Cardiol in international bibliometric databases, which has enabled us to anticipate and make decisions from the editorial perspective that we believe to have had positive effects at the bibliometric level; and e) transparency in the decisions made and access for readers, authors, and SEC members. Based on these principles, major steps have been taken. The most important is perhaps the launch of 2 new journals within the REC Publications family, which we believe to have been highly positive for the SEC. Major milestones have been reached, such as the highest IF of the entire history of Rev Esp Cardiol, the highest level of external citation (with the associated reduction in self-citations), and the awarding of the 2019 MEDES (MEDicina en ESpañol [Medicine in Spanish]) prize. In parallel, the processes in the editorial office have been streamlined, which, together with the incorporation of 2 new colleagues (Helena Gómez-Lobo and Belén Juan), has allowed us to markedly boost the quantity and quality of manuscripts handled in Rev Esp Cardiol. All of this has improved efficiency, which has gone hand-in-hand with cost containment and better results for the journal that favor its sustainability.

Nonetheless, we undoubtedly have made decisions that could be questioned. Possibly the least enjoyable aspect of our activity is the need to reject a higher number of manuscripts to fit the available publication space, although our results reveal rejection rates similar to those of previous years. Nonetheless, the rejection of manuscripts has sometimes been an issue for authors. We wish to reiterate that decisions made regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection have always been based on a careful and thoughtful consideration of not only reviewer comments, but also editorial priorities, with the focus on the selection of the best of the material available. Regardless, manuscript rejections that have led to an author appeal have always been reassessed by the editorial team and sometimes by other external reviewers.

Perhaps one of the most novel initiatives of this team has been the establishment of a competitive process66 for the selection of a new Editor-in-Chief. The selection is based on curriculum, previous experience, and the presentation by the candidates of a project/plan for Rev Esp Cardiol in the coming years. Although this is the first time that we have launched a procedure of this type, we believe that it will be highly positive, enabling the discovery of new talent while boosting the prestige and rigor of the new editorial team and the journal itself. By the time this manuscript is published, the person who will take on the role of Editor-in-Chief for the next editorial period will possibly already have been selected. The next step will be an overlap period lasting several months to enable the new Editor-in-Chief to learn the journal procedures and select the new editorial team. The activity of the new team will finally begin in October 2021. All of us here would like to encourage the members of the next team and wish them the best in their coming adventure. The challenge is considerable but highly rewarded by the privilege of being one of the most important assets of the Spanish Society of Cardiology.

None declared.