PROTEOMICS: Into the next decade

Editorial: Twenty‐Five Years Later…

Editorial

The Australian Occupational Therapy Journal (AOTJ) is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), an organisation that supports editors, editorial boards, and publishers to ensure a culture of ethical practices. In accordance, the publication arrangements and policies of the journal must be ethically sound and transparent. It is particularly important that AOTJ, a society journal working with both Occupational Therapy Australia and the publisher Wiley, establish governance practices that are clear and transparent. The editorials within this volume of AOTJ have spoken to quality and research integrity, and it is time to take an inward view. The introduction of a publicly advertised expression of interest for board membership in late 2019 was a first step in creating transparent processes. A new structure was created within the editorial board: the Associate Editors continue to assist the Editor-in-Chief with the management of submitted manuscripts; and the Editorial Board Members (EBM) provide support for initiatives and reviews. The role of EBM supports new members to learn the business of the journal, including governance and publishing ethics, prior to their entry into role of Associate Editor and manuscript management. All members of the editorial board now have terms of appointment to support a regular turnover of members while ensuring continuity of knowledge and succession planning. The members of the editorial board are volunteers for Occupational Therapy Australia, and we are building a system of governance while recognising the importance of editorial independence. We are introducing an induction process for all new members to clearly outline journal policies and processes, code of conduct expectations, confidentiality statements, etc. The induction process includes a conflict of interest declaration and the board is examining how to manage conflicts of interest within meetings, management of manuscripts, and publishing. An upcoming, independently facilitated session will further develop our understanding of conflicts of interest in the context of a journal editorial board. As incoming Editor-in-Chief, I gave due consideration to perceived or actual conflicts of interest and implemented the following approaches early in 2020. Firstly, I consider that I have a conflict of interest during editorial and review processes for other occupational therapy journals. I have therefore made myself unavailable for the duration of my term with AOTJ. Secondly, I have identified a perceived conflict of interest for manuscripts submitted to the journal with a current colleague or collaborator as an author. It is now editorial policy to allocate these manuscripts to an Associate Editor for management, removing the potential for any perceived influence, and ensuring confidence in the rigorous review process and final editorial decision. The more difficult issue, for all members of the editorial board and myself as Editor-in-Chief, relates to publication within the journal. As leaders in the profession, the editorial board have collaborators and research students who wish to publish in their professional association journal. COPE advice that there are examples of when an editor may publish in their own journal but that every effort must be made to minimise bias (COPE, 2005). This advice has been applied across all members of the editorial board with the following processes. Any manuscript submitted by a member of the editorial board is managed by the Editor-in-Chief and the manuscript is reviewed by experts external to the board. Any manuscript submitted with the Editor-in-Chief listed as a co-author is automatically allocated by the publishing assistant at Wiley to an Associate Editor. The Editor-in-Chief has no access to the manuscript during any stage of the review process or the editorial decision. Finally, we are introducing a policy that any manuscript authored by members of the editorial board will include a conflict of interest statement that clearly outlines their association with the journal and how this conflict was managed during the review process. To be clear, the pursuit of ethical practices in publishing have always been a focus of the AOTJ Editorial Board. This year, with the support of Occupational Therapy Australia and Wiley, we are formalising existing policies and processes and enhancing governance practices. The AOTJ has a strong commitment to ethical and transparent practices that maintain the highest standards in publication ethics.

Passing the Torch

AJPE Welcomes Fjortoft and Schlesselman as Associate Editors

STARTING in 2012, TMC will be going paperless! The journal will be published in a form called OnlinePlus (http:// www.computer.org/onlineplus), in which the format and pagination of a paper issue is maintained, since citation indices and academic promotion processes heavily depend upon these. Subscribers will, at a lower subscription rate, be given access to the full online archive. They will also receive, once every quarter, a small booklet containing abstracts of published articles from three issues and a CD-ROM containing electronic copies of these articles. I would like to take the opportunity to thank Dr. Mani Srivastava for his phenomenal service to the community as Editor-in-Chief. During his tenure, he has raised the quality and the visibility of the journal and has managed its growth and evolution in impressive fashion. He has left big shoes to fi ll! I would also like to welcome our new Associate Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Ram Ramanathan, who is Principal Research Scientist at Raytheon BBN. The journal has grown in size and stature over the years and has reached a point where it can benefi t greatly from a second person at the helm, and Ram has graciously agreed to take on that responsibility. Ram has played a leadership role in the fi eld of mobile computing for nearly two decades, and was also a former associate editor of TMC. Our Editorial Board continues to evolve, and I would like to take this opportunity to introduce the new members, whose biographies appear below, and thank the outgoing ones. I would like to welcome aboard several new Associate Editors to fi ll gaps left by Associate Editors whose terms expired, and to strengthen the Editorial Board’s expertise in emerging areas. It is my pleasure to introduce Fan Bai, Ranveer Chandra, Olivier Dousse, Michael Fang, Christina Fragouli, Allen MacKenzie, and Mihail Sichitiu. Together, they bring expertise in vehicular networks, cognitive radios, cellular networks, network information theory, game theory, location management, and localization. They also increase our international and industry representation. I would like to thank them for taking time from their busy schedules to volunteer for this important service to the community. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the contributions of four Associate Editors whose terms ended recently or who stepped down for personal reasons: Samir Das, Aura Ganz, Srikanth Krishnamurthy, and Marwan Krunz. They brought unique perspectives and expertise to the journal, and we are the richer for it. I greatly appreciate the dedication, diligence, and promptness they have shown during their terms. TMC continues to be a very desirable publication venue for mobile and wireless computing and networking, and this would not be possible without the support of our readers and authors, the members of the Editorial Board, the Steering Committee, and the Computer Society staff. I look forward to hearing feedback from our readership and receiving suggestions for ways to improve the journal in the coming years.

Chaos as opportunity

The history of <scp>NFOG</scp> and <i>Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica</i> 1921–2011

Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery: 20 years on

It iswith great pleasure that I announce the new associate and assistant editors and the members of the editorial board and the international advisory committee. Associate Editor Susan Iannaccone, MD, will handle book reviews, and Associate Editor E. S. Roach, MD, will emphasize the acquisition of manuscripts in child neurology. The popular and effective controversy-consensus series will continue under the able direction of Associate Editor Vladimir Hachinski, MD. Associate Editor David E. Pleasure, MD, will develop a regular neurological reviews section. The history section will be directed by Assistant Editor Christopher Goetz, MD. Assistant Editor Ira Shoulson, MD, will provide guidance related to thematic issues of theArchives, and Assistant Editor Lawrence S. Honig, MD, PhD, will assist in implementing programs directed at electronic and multimedia publication. We wish to express our most sincere gratitude to the retiring chief editor, Robert J. Joynt, MD, PhD, for his 15 years

At the start of my Ph.D. in 1980, I caught a glimpse, purely by chance, of the emerging field of computer-aided design (CAD). It intrigued and fascinated me to such an extent that I ended up scrapping my original plans, switching schools and changing my research area. Even though my new school, Ohio State, was one of only a handful of schools with computing facilities dedicated to CAD, I ran into stiff resistance when I expressed my desire to get a Ph.D. in CAD. I was told that CAD was hardly an intellectually challenging field worthy of a Ph.D. dissertation. I was directed to consider mainstream mechanical engineering areas, such as solid mechanics, vibrations, kinematics, and dynamics. The closest I could get to CAD was to do my dissertation in FEA, which allowed me to do at least part of my work in computing and visualization.When I began my academic career at Arizona State, I thought I was finally free to pursue my true love. But I soon realized that we were still a fringe group; faculty in traditional fields, such as thermofluids and solid mechanics, took a dim view of computational research. The proposed thesis plan for my first graduate student (Expert System for Conceptual Synthesis of Frame Structures) was rejected by the Graduate Chair, who remarked “This is not mechanical engineering.” He viewed it as purely a computer program without any regard for the fact that we needed to explicate, structure, and represent experiential knowledge for structural synthesis not found in any textbook on the subject.Of course, I was not alone in facing this predicament. Fortunately, for misfits like us there was an ASME Division that welcomed us. Originally named the Computer Engineering Division (CED), and later known as Computer &amp; Information Engineering (CIE) Division, it was approved in 1979 and began operating in 1980. Unlike academia, industry was well aware of the potential of computing and information technologies to revolutionize product design and manufacturing. Visionaries from computer industry (CDC, IBM, DEC, Applicon), an infant software industry (SDRC, CV, Swanson), and a variety of OEMs (GM, GE, McDonnell-Douglas) led a grassroots effort to convince ASME of the importance of mechanical engineers active participation in these evolving areas through the creation of a new Division. The first CED newsletter in 1981 boldly heralds “…the dawn of an era that is certain to be dominated by computer technology. All projections indicate that mechanical engineers, more than any other professional group, will be more involved in the utilization of this (computer) technology.” They saw MEs playing as important a role in the IT revolution as their far predecessors had in the industrial revolution—a prediction that was to come true.Prof. Ali Seirig was appointed the first Chair of CED. I am in awe of the progress this new Division made in just the first two years. Twenty-four technical committees were set up and an annual conference was initiated in 1981. This conference was unique in that it was associated with an exhibition of the latest hardware and software from leading vendors. This element was critical in keeping the ASME community well informed about the current state of engineering computing. It is, therefore, not surprising to see that this Division was heavily industry dominated—21 out of 24 Technical Committee Chairs were from industry. Sadly, today industry participation in CIE has sagged. Did CIE change because industry participation diminished, or did industry reduce its participation because CIE became less relevant to their needs? We can only speculate about the reasons.CED soon became the fastest growing Division within ASME. The CED/CIE conference and exhibition attracted participants from a wide range of areas, not just CAD/CAM and FEA but kinematics, robotics, heat transfer, and fluid mechanics. This diverse community only had one thing in common, the application of computational methods to problems in their respective fields. As traditional conferences and journals gradually came around to seeing computational methods as valuable contributions in their own fields, they became more accepting of papers of this nature. Thus began the return of computational researchers back to their own discipline communities, shrinking the size of CIE conferences. Finally, in 1994, the CIE conference was colocated with Design Engineering Technical Conferences (DETC).The founders of CED debated the type of journal they needed to have. They felt that given the rapid evolution of computing technologies, an archival journal like an ASME Transactions was not appropriate. At the same time, they wanted their journal to be more technical than a trade magazine. They ended up creating a “hybrid” quarterly publication called CIME (Computers in Mechanical Engineering), with Ali Seirig as its editor. This magazine was produced in full color and was very informative about the latest developments in engineering software. In the words of the editor, CIME was “user-oriented” not “research oriented.” Unfortunately, this philosophy did not command much respect in academia and eventually CIME was merged into ASME’s monthly magazine Mechanical Engineering.And so it came to be that unlike all other ASME conferences and Divisions, CIE did not have any associated journal. Over the years, CIE leaders made several attempts at getting a Transactions journal approved, but to no avail. Reasons for rejection ranged from “computing technologies have no archival value” to the failure to sustain CIME magazine.In 2000, a small group of CIE Division “activists” decided to make another push for a journal. Yong Se Kim, David Lee, Simon Szykman, and David Rosen were the principals in this effort. They came up with a strategy based on lessons from past failures. That included building alliances with three other Divisions (Design, Manufacturing, and Systems &amp; Controls), and demonstrating that an editorial board could be formed with well known researchers who had extensive publication records. I became aware of this effort when I received a call out of the blue, asking me the intriguing question “How would you like to be the Chief Editor of an ASME Transactions?” Of course, the very next sentence brought me down to earth quickly “…the problem is that the journal doesn’t yet exist – will you help us get it approved by ASME?” Thus began my involvement with this journal. We put together an impressive editorial board that included two NAE members and research leaders in each of our targeted areas. Phil Divitero, ASME Director of Publications, immediately saw the marketing potential of this journal, and became a key ally. Bahram Ravani, DED Chair, gave valuable advice on writing our proposal to ASME. Art Erdman, himself a CIE pioneer, happened to be the Chair of ASME Publication Committee, which had authority of approving new journals, which gave us a much needed sympathetic ear on the committee to make our case. In a café in Chicago, before our presentation, we brainstormed various names for the journal and settled on Journal of Computing &amp; Information Science in Engineering (JCISE). The journal was approved and began publishing in the first year of the new millennium, 2001. The CIE Division finally had an archival journal of its own with three cosponsoring Divisions. In 2005, after much lobbying and deliberation, the Design Engineering Division became an equal partner with CIE—an important step in going mainstream.From the very beginning we decided to focus sharply on computational methods for mechanical product development. This set us apart from journals from private publishers that accepted everything and anything related to computing—from gaming to geology, from biology to every branch of engineering. We did not want to dilute our journal with such a wide and general scope. We stipulated that every paper submitted to JCISE must demonstrate applications of its techniques to mechanical design, mechanical analysis, product manufacturing, or quality assurance. Through several iterations we settled on eight major categories to include within the scope of our journal: solid modeling (including parametrics), computational geometry (including reverse engineering), computational metrology (including CMM and tolerance modeling), haptics and virtual reality, engineering informatics, simulation (including FEA, meshing, and optimization), AI/Knowledge based systems, and computer aided manufacturing. Given the practical nature of our field, we also decided to publish papers along two tracks: Research and Application. The latter has subcategories of Software Reviews, Technology Reviews, Tech Notes, and Industry Pilot Projects. The idea was to keep the journal relevant to industry as well as academia. We instituted a three-level rigorous review process for appointment of Associate Editors. We owe it to the founding editorial board for setting sound policies that resulted in quick recognition of JCISE as an archival publication of high quality. That group consisted of Paul Wright, David Rosen, Nick Patrikalakis, Deba Dutta, Susan Urban, Martti Mantyla, Dana Nau, S. Jayaram, Pradeep Khosla, Harry Cheng, and Ravi Rangan. Since we see ourselves as being at the intersection of computer science and mechanical engineering, it was appropriate to have about half of the AEs from each field, and we managed to do so.ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) approached us in 2001 to become an official cosponsor—an offer we gladly accepted in order to strengthen the linkage with our computer science colleagues. From 2001 to 2004, we published a special issue annually drawn from the best papers of the ACM Solid Modeling conferences. Unfortunately, this conference series became too broad, and it was difficult to accommodate their best papers in JCISE without violating our objective of serving the engineering community; this annual tradition of ACM special issues had to be discontinued.ISI included JCISE in its data collection in 2004; after 3 years of this process, the first Impact Factors for JCISE became available in 2007 (for the 2004–2006 period). With respect to ISI Impact Factors, JCISE ranks in the top third of all ASME Transactions; it is better than many long established journals in CAD/CAM and AI areas. Our Impact Factor has continued to improve each year. How meaningful are such statistics in gauging the quality of a journal is debatable. More meaningful metrics are in the offing and we hope they will supplant bean counters of today.When we opened shop in 2000, ASME did not have any web based tool for paper submission and review management. Being the journal focused on computing and information science, we refused to conduct paper reviews the old fashioned way and began developing eLane. With the help of one of our associate editors, Susan Urban, a database expert, and one of her brilliant students, Anish Shah (no relation), we designed and implemented eLane over a period of 3 years. For the past 10 years, we have hosted, maintained, and continuously improved eLane to support not only JCISE but also other journals, such as Research in Engineering Design, and CIE, DTM, and NSF Grantees conferences. eLane blazed a new trail and guided ASME to develop its own “Journal Tool.” Data security and confidentiality is a critical issue in online systems. I am particularly indebted to one of our founding associate editors, Simon Szykman, who provided valuable advice on security aspects of the system by constantly trying to enter the system through unintended holes. It is no surprise that Simon went on to become the first Director of the Cyber-Security group at US Department of Homeland Security and is now the CIO of the Department of Commerce.With Bahram Ravani taking over as the new chief editor of JCISE, we have begun the process of gradually migrating from eLane to ASME’s Journal Tool. Although the Journal Tool still lacks some functionality available in eLane, the reasons for migration are that this will provide greater visibility to JCISE through ASME websites, set JCISE at par with other Transactions, make it easier to transfer papers between ASME journals and, most importantly, have 24/7 support from ASME’s IT professionals.My tenure as chief editor is ending as it started, with a special issue providing snapshots of each of the technology areas within our scope. In both cases, I put together a wish list of papers and expert groups to co-author the state of art reviews. I had hoped to have every area covered, but some papers did not materialize this time around. Nevertheless, this special issue will be a good reference for most, if not all of the areas JCISE covers. For V1 N1, I invited each of our founding Associate Editors to write state-of-the-art surveys of their fields in collaboration with other experts in their respective areas. This special issue contains survey papers not only in some well-established CIE areas but also in a few emerging fields.Computational methods and information technologies related to engineering product development have come a long way. CAD, CAM, FEA, CFD, VR, Reverse Engineering, Computational Metrology, Optimization, and many other simulation techniques are now pervasive in industry. Even traditional fields, such as thermal science, fluid mechanics, and solid mechanics, have embraced numerical methods and computer visualization. What started on the fringes is now the mainstream. We owe it to the founders of the CED/CIE Division who saw this potential more than 30 years ago. Let us recognize Ali Seireg (Wisconsin), J. Callahan (McDonnell Douglas), V. Tipnis, T. Shoup (Santa Clara), D. Dietrich (Swanson), L. Hulbert (Battelle), E. Heer (NASA), S. Rhode (GM), R. Fulton (Georgia Tech), J.Cokonis (GE), R. Arvikar (Bell Labs), J. Lemon (SDRC), D. Riley (U. Minnesota), and R. Raghavan (Foster Wheeler).A high quality archival journal is extremely important to any research community. A conference alone cannot be sufficient. Conferences, at least in engineering, serve the purpose of quick dissemination of work in progress. Having an archival journal aids the maturation of a research community. Not all conference papers are suitable for archival in a journal. An additional complication in computing and IT is the rapid rate of development and consequent obsolescence of ideas and methods. What then should we archive? There certainly are many techniques in our field that have withstood the test of time. B-Rep solid models, B-splines, and NURBS, regularized Boolean algorithms, Attributed Adjacency Graph based feature recognition, and bipartite graphs for constraint solving are but a few examples. But most research is incremental, and it is important to archive snapshots of major milestones in each area. NURBS did not just come about suddenly. There were B-splines, rational B-splines before the idea of nonuniform knot spacing.JCISE associate editors serve 3 year terms, renewable for an additional 3. In addition to the founding group of AEs, I want to take this opportunity to thank all our current and past AEs. They are the ones that do the bulk of the work and get the credit for maintaining our high quality. I am very grateful to the following individuals: J. Michopoulos, K. Saitou, A. Goel, I. Grosse, K. Law, X. Qian, J. Oliver, S. McMains, S. Gao, A. Fischer, J. Vandenbrande, C. Geiger, Y. Kitamura, C. McMahon, A. Joneja, S. K. Gupta, R. Crawford, K. Lee, J. Corney, N. Dorighi, L. Joskowicz, and S. Callahan.I am sure that our new chief editor, Bahram Ravani, will take JCISE to new heights. My very best wishes to JCISE readers, authors, and reviewers. For me, this has been a labor of love.

INTRODUCTION: Despite substantial progress for women in medicine, women remain underrepresented in many aspects of the scholarly publication process. Appointment to an editorial board conveys a degree of prestige that may influence hiring, tenure, or promotion decisions and provides opportunities for intellectual growth and networking that can improve the quality of a research program. Women face multiple challenges in representation in medicine and our aim was to look at the representation of women in the scholarly publication process. The purpose of this study was to analyze the proportion of female representation in editorial boards of the major gastroenterology journals. METHODS: We examined the four major gastroenterology journals, American Journal of Gastroenterology, Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and Hepatology. The editorial boards of each journal from 2020 were included. The gender of each person, and the total number of individuals as editors and on the editorial board were abstracted. The number of females on the editorial boards were compared to the total number of individuals. RESULTS: There were a total of 511 individuals across the four major journals included as editors, associate, or deputy editors and on the editorial boards of the journals. The total number of women included as associate or deputy editors varied but remained significantly below that of men. (See Figure 1). None of the editors in chiefs of the major gastroenterology journals were females. Similarly, the representation of women on editorial boards was extremely low and significantly below that of men. (See Figure 2). CONCLUSION: There were significant disparities in female representation in editorial boards across the major gastroenterology journals. Addressing these disparities may promote academic advancement for female gastroenterologists and promote greater equality of participation in the scholarly peer-review process.Figure 1

The Year in Review: Time to Celebrate

The field of biomaterials science is a constant wonder, with the advent or application of new chemistries; novel methods to characterize biomaterials in unprecedented resolution; and exciting applications of existing, composite, or innovative biomaterials to biomedical problems. The journal will continue to publish original contributions concerning studies of the preparation, performance, and evaluation of biomaterials and the response of blood and tissues to biomaterials. In addition, interdisciplinary areas are covered, such as tissue engineering, medical devices, and controlled release technology where biomaterials play a significant role. We welcome high-quality submissions by investigators throughout the world who are making exciting advancements in these areas. The journal will also continue to publish award-winning papers selected annually by SFB, as well as timely and critical review articles. Over the last several years, the publication landscape for biomaterials research has grown substantially and provides many opportunities to publish one's work. Such decisions are made for many reasons, including the publication process, perceptions of journal impact, alignment with a professional society, turnaround time for decision, ability to effectively reach one's target audience, and visibility of the work. As the official journal of the SFB, I aim to ensure that JBMR Part A is at the top of every author's list when considering where to submit their best work. We can accomplish this by (a) identifying, inviting, and accepting high quality work; (b) publishing articles that are of wide interest; and (c) increasing the visibility and contributions of accepted articles. We have identified a collection of new Associate Editors, representing the breadth of research within our discipline. Along with myself, these individuals will be tasked with managing the review process closely in order to ensure the quality and rigor of submissions and accelerate our time to first decision. It is my goal that all submissions to the journal receive a first decision in less than 1 month. Furthermore, we have empowered Associate Editors to personally solicit submissions at scientific meetings and to also reach decisions based on their own evaluation of submissions. We need to continue striving to decrease turnaround time, increase diversity of submissions, and ensure that only high-quality papers are published. It is imperative that we accelerate publication if we are to elevate the journal to the highest level. In addition, we will use social media and other platforms to highlight the publication of new work in the journal and amplify its reach throughout the community. I will regularly evaluate the composition of our Editorial Board to ensure its involvement in our mission. Participation on our Editorial Board is an honor and recognition of great accomplishments in our discipline, and I will leverage this expertise in several ways. I will call upon the Board for advice and suggestions to continually improve all aspects of the journal. Members of the Board will be asked to evaluate papers in a timely manner. Emerging initiatives will include a reviewer mentoring program to provide personal training on best practices for reviewing papers in the journal, where trainees will be selected and matched with members of the Board. This will provide an opportunity to enhance reviewer expertise and build a connection between trainees and the journal as a preferred target for submitting manuscripts. These initiatives will empower the Board to have a lasting, positive influence on the future of the journal. Such a venture requires the participation of many individuals. Our publisher Wiley is continually working to streamline the submission process to make the submission of your manuscript faster and more efficient. Our Associate Editors and Editorial Board work hard in this largely volunteer effort because of their commitment to our discipline. Our scientific community should submit our best work to JBMR Part A and say “yes” when asked to serve as reviewers. Your reviews should be thoughtful, accurate, and returned in a timely manner to improve the quality of the work and shorten the review time. We must continue to improve the quality of work published in our journal through critical discussions at annual meetings, effective reviews of submitted papers, and referencing papers from our journal in other publications. I look forward to representing our societies and discipline in this important role and partnering with Wiley Publishing to expand the reach of our journal around the globe. It is an exciting time in our field. Please embrace the JBMR Part A and help us reach the heights that our journal deserves. Onward and upward! Kent

The past year has been an eventful one for the Journal of Lipid Research (JLR). The Directors of Lipid Research, Inc. (LRI), the owner of the Journal since its inception in 1959, are pleased to make some important announcements that should be of great interest to our authors and readers. The first of these is the transfer of ownership of the JLR to the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) in July 2003. In June 2000, LRI entered into an agreement with the ASBMB to manage the publication of the Journal.