JoCO Editorial Board Meeting

February 24th 2023

Members Present

  • David M. Miller
  • Sophia Z. Shalhout
  • Howard L. Kaufman
  • Issac Brownell
  • Vishal A. Patel
  • Sonia Cohen

Overview

  • Mission Statements
    • SoCO/COIG
    • JoCO
  • Types of Content
  • Review process
  • Editorial Board Expectations
  • Periodicity of Issues
  • Next Steps

Publisher of JoCO

  • When JoCO was initially launched, the organization responsible for its publication was known as the Cutaneous Oncology Interest Group or COIG
  • Modifications to that name have been proposed, including:
    • CCO: Community of Cutaneous Oncology
    • CCO: Consortium of Cutaneous Oncology
    • COC: Cutaneous Oncology Consortium
    • SoCO: Society of Cutaneous Oncology
  • After a thorough discussion, the Editorial team favored SoCO

SoCO Mission Statement

  • The Society of Cutaneous Oncology (SoCO) is a collective of clinicians & investigators committed to improving outcomes for patients with skin cancer
  • Our mission is threefold:
    1. To Interpret current evidence to help shape best practices
    2. Support members in producing high-quality reproducible science
    3. Educate future generations of clinical oncologists and scientific investigators dedicated to skin cancer

SoCO Mission Statement

  • To fulfill those objectives SoCO:
    1. Hosts a recurring monthly Journal Club
    2. Supports a periodic Scientific Forum for research discussions
    3. Is the publisher of Journal of Cutaneous Oncology (JoCO), an open access journal whose scope is specific to skin cancer
    4. Annual Meeting

Why JoCO?

  • The SoCO is special multi-disciplinary and inter-professional community
  • JoCO will provide a forum/tool to disseminate the perspectives and contributions of this group
  • Academic publishing has challenges
    • For investigators
    • For reviewers
    • For publishers

Challenges for Investigators

  • The bias towards “positive” results stifles scientific investigation and hinders progress
    • Can lead to the “file-drawer” problem
  • Pressure to publish “confirmatory” studies, when most academic investigations are truly “exploratory” in nature
  • Restrictive publishing formats can limit scientific story-telling
  • Review process can take months, to nearly 1 year before work is disseminated

Challenges for Reviewers

  • The incentives for reviewers to participate are limited
  • Compensation is not proportional to effort/skill level
    • CME credit has marginal value
    • Limited sense of community in the process
    • Overall diminishing return in regards to academic credit

Challenges for Publishers

  • Obtaining high-quality reviewers is increasingly challenging
  • Emphasis on a Journal’s Impact Factor can affect editorial decisions

Why JoCO?

  • JoCO will represent a community-based enterprise to disseminate the contributions from SoCO
    • A “For Us By Us” approach
  • JoCO will capitalize on the network created by SoCO

JoCO Content

  • Current:
    • Perspectives on the Science
  • Proposed Future Content:
    • Original Research
      • In order to maximized alignment of the various stakeholders in SoCO, the editorial team proposed an innovative review process for original content, based on a research ethos espoused by the editorial team

JoCO Research Ethos

flowchart TD

step1["Step 1: Formulate Research Question/Problem Statement"]

step1 --> step2["Step 2: Thorough Literature Search"]

step2 --> step3["Step 3: Decide if study is Exploratory or Confirmatory"]

JoCO Research Ethos

flowchart TD

step1["Step 1: Formulate Research Question/Problem Statement"]

step1 --> step2["Step 2: Thorough Literature Search"]

step2 --> step3["Step 3: Decide if study is Exploratory or Confirmatory"]

step3 --> step3a["Exploratory Study"]

step3 --> step3b["Confirmatory Study"]

step4["Step 4: Preregister/Publish SAP"]

step3a --> step4

step3b --> step4

step4 --> step5["Step 5: Conduct Investigation"]

step5 --> step6["Step 6: Interpret Results"]

step6 --> ExpStudy["Exploratory Study"]

step6 --> ConfStudy["Confirmatory Study"]

ExpStudy --> step7a["Step 7: Publish Results"]

ConfStudy --> step7b["Step 7: Publish Results"]

step7a --> step8a["Step 8: Plan Confirmatory Study"]

step7b --> step8b["Step 8: Plan Corollary Study"]

Innovative Review Process

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

present1 --> invitation["Invitation by JoCO Editorial Team to Preregister SAP"]

invitation --"Incorporate feedback"--> preregister["Preregister SAP (e.g. OSF or JoCO) <br> Clearly define Exploratory vs. Confirmatory Study"]

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

subgraph A[" "]
proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

present1 --> invitation["Invitation by JoCO Editorial Team to Preregister SAP"]

invitation --"Incorporate feedback"--> preregister["Preregister SAP (e.g. OSF or JoCO) <br> Clearly define Exploratory vs. Confirmatory Study"]

end

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

recorded["Elements of Peer-Review <br> (Recorded Meetings)"]:::leaf2

classDef leaf1 fill:#DDA0DD
classDef leaf2 fill:#f96

subgraph A[" "]
proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

present1 --> invitation["Invitation by JoCO Editorial Team to Preregister SAP"]

invitation --"Incorporate feedback"--> preregister["Preregister SAP (e.g. OSF or JoCO) <br> Clearly define Exploratory vs. Confirmatory Study"]

end

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

recorded["Elements of Peer-Review <br> (Recorded Meetings)"]:::leaf2

classDef leaf1 fill:#DDA0DD
classDef leaf2 fill:#f96

subgraph A[" "]
direction RL

proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

present1 --> invitation["Invitation by JoCO Editorial Team to Preregister SAP"]

invitation --"Incorporate feedback"--> preregister["Preregister SAP (e.g. OSF or JoCO) <br> Clearly define Exploratory vs. Confirmatory Study"]

end

preregister --> research["Conduct Research"]

Innovative Review Process

flowchart TD

recorded["Elements of Peer-Review <br> (Recorded Meetings)"]:::leaf2

classDef leaf1 fill:#DDA0DD
classDef leaf2 fill:#f96

subgraph A[" "]
direction RL

proposal["SoCO member asks to propose a research question"]

proposal --> present1["Present research question at SoCO Research Forum"]:::leaf2

present1 --> invitation["Invitation by JoCO Editorial Team to Preregister SAP"]

invitation --"Incorporate feedback"--> preregister["Preregister SAP (e.g. OSF or JoCO) <br> Clearly define Exploratory vs. Confirmatory Study"]

end

preregister --> research["Conduct Research"]


subgraph B[" "]
direction LR

present2["Present research at SoCO Meeting"]:::leaf2

present2 --"Incorporate feedback"--> manuscript["Write Manuscript"]

manuscript --> submit["Submit to JoCO"]

end 

submit --> publish["Manuscript published on JoCO along with recorded meetings"]:::leaf1



research --> present2

Caveats

  • While SoCO is a multi-disciplinary and inter-professional group with broad domain knowledge, there are limits to the expertise of its members
  • Publishing in a journal without an impact factor (which will be the case for at least 2 years) is a significant disincentive for society members

Editorial Board Expectations

  • Editorial board members are expected to attend periodic JoCO Editorial Board Meetings (3-6 per year)
  • Regularly attend SoCO Journal Club meetings
  • Members will participate in the peer review process of submissions to JoCO
  • Participation in perspectives on the science pieces are recommended and members should encourage their trainees to lead a Perspective on the Science when appropriate

Periodicity of Issues

  • 2 Issues per year

Next Steps

  • File for ISSN with agreed upon Publisher
  • Register on Crossref
  • Obtain DOIs for published content
  • Plan for pubmed indexing

Pubmed Central Indexing

  • Need ISSN
  • 25 peer-reviewed articles
  • Meet PMC’s language guidelines
  • Two years of scholarly publishing
  • comply with NLM’s Collection Development Guidelines