We read with interest the editorial in the March 2005 issue of Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia (
Clutton, 2005
) on factors affecting the sequence of manuscript publication. We are compelled to
comment on the topic of publication sequence and some specific points made by the
Editor. Our comments are given from a contributing author's point of view, and in
the spirit that the journal is a “living” collection and disseminator of new information;
one that continues to evolve and grow stronger with time. Our comments in no way should
be construed as an attempt to discredit the hard work and at times thankless efforts
of the Editors and editorial staff. Indeed, we commend the individuals serving as
Editors and publicly thank them for their tireless, often overlooked, devotion to
duty as the stewards of the Journal. Finally, our comments are largely directed to
editorial policy, a course of current actions presumably set by a larger group than
the author of the words that have prompted this response.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Veterinary Anaesthesia and AnalgesiaAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Factors affecting publication sequence.Vet Anaesth Analg. 2005; 32: 59-60
- The role of the reviewer.Vet Anaesth Analg. 2003; 30: 62-63
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2005 Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and American College of Veterinary Anesthesia and Analgesia. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
