Editorial Message ================= * Khalid Hundallah * Waleed Khoja **I**n January 2023, the Neurosciences Journal will complete 28 years of continuous publication. Since 1996, the journal has embarked on a long, endless journey and has taken on this weighty expedition. We are struggling to achieve global, regional, and local dominance. The length of time required for peer review and revisions is a major concern for the authors. The revision and peer-review processes have been the subject of numerous inquiries. In this editorial, we will provide a brief explanation of the publication journey, and then shed light on last year’s achievements and statistics. For many authors, publishing their research in a peer-reviewed journal is difficult, and they find this lengthy and difficult process frustrating. The author begins the journey by writing his manuscript and using the online journal system to submit a complete manuscript to the journal. We check the paper’s structure and arrangement against the journal’s instructions to ensure required sections are included. Then, the editor evaluates the manuscript and performs the initial screening. If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it will be sent to a poll of reviewers for revision. Once the peer review process and the reviewers’ comments are complete, the editor will decide whether or not to publish the manuscript. If the manuscript is not accepted for publication, it will be sent back to the author for revision. If the author fails to modify his manuscript according to the revision instructions, the manuscript will be rejected and not published. However, if the author completes the revisions as instructed, the editorial office will do a quick and fast review with the editor and reviewers to assess the updated version. The manuscript version will be accepted for publication in the next issue, after undergoing all necessary revisions. Peer review is defined as a process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field.1 This helps to maintain quality standards, improve performance and provide credibility. Additionally, it assists the publisher, editor-in-chief, and editorial office in determining whether a manuscript should be published in the journal, accepted with revisions, or rejected. To avoid criticisms for delays in publishing and perceptions of bias against the editors and/or reviewers, editors carefully read and examine the manuscript during the review process. This is to check whether the science behind the study is true, how well designed the study is, and the appropriateness of the method used. However, the Neurosciences Journal also offers an independent review for every manuscript, and we give authors the chance to improve on their work. The peer review process is conducted in one of three ways: open review, single-blind review, or double-blind review.2 In an open review, both the author and the reviewer know each other’s identity. In a single-blind review, the reviewers’ identity remains anonymous; however, the author’s identity is revealed to the reviewers. In a double-blind review, both the reviewers and the authors are anonymous. To prevent bias from the reviewers, the Neuroscience Journal is double blinded. This allows the paper to be judged based on the quality of the content rather than on the author’s reputation. In addition to the three kinds of peer reviews, publications may undergo post-publication reviews. For published articles, we encourage correspondence with the author; we also send the comments to the corresponding author and publish his/her reply. ### Activating Publons The Neurosciences Journal highly recognizes reviewers’ contributions in the peer review process. Apart from publishing reviewers’names in the yearly editorial message, we activated Publons in our peer review system. Publons is a free platform that creates and verifies researchers’ peer reviews and editorial contributions. Whenever a reviewer submits a review, they will be asked whether they want to receive recognition on Publons.3 ### Journal impact factor is a way of ranking journals The standing of a journal in the field is determined by various journal-ranking systems. One of Garfield’s most well-known inventions was the impact factor, which has been acquired by Clarivite Analytics. Garfield founded the Institute of Scientific Information.4 A journal’s impact factor measures the average number of citations to a journal’s article over a period of time. Other classifications, such as source-normalized impact per paper, h-index, and SCImago journal ranking are also used. The journal’s impact factor for the current year is 0.735, and with the support of our authors, we will keep working to improve this. ### Workshop for education The Neurosciences Journal, in conjunction with the 7th Annual Saudi Pediatric Neurology Society (SPNS) conference, which took place in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on November 11, 2022, organized a workshop on medical publication. The SPNS funded the workshop. The educational program was organized by experts in the publication field and the journal’s editorial office. The topics covered in this scientific program included “writing your manuscript for publication, how to search your references, guidelines for writing your manuscript, peer review process, tips for publishing your manuscript, common reasons for rejection, predatory journals, and publication ethics.” The primary objective of this workshop was to educate researchers on the publication process and to highlight the ethical issues that the editorial office encounters during article review processes. In addition, researchers will gain extensive knowledge and recognize the significance of publication in their careers. In January 2023, the journal will have a booth at the Saudi Neurology Society Conference in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from January 12 to January 14. ### Google Analytics Our Google Analytics results show that from January to December 2022, more than 47,000 people visited our website. This is a significant increase compared to the previous year’s statistics.5 The top six countries from which the sessions originated were the United States, Saudi Arabia, India, the United Kingdom, China, and Turkey—the same countries as the previous year’s report. Based on our website audience statistics, medical residents and fellows aged 18 to 34 years made up our website’s audience, and they were more aware of the importance of publishing even before entering the residency program. This finding is consistent with last year’s insights.is finding was consistent with last year insights. ### Statistics In 2022, our average rejection rate was 38%. Papers outside the journal’s scope, papers of low scientific quality that do not meet the journal’s requirements, authors’ failure to submit necessary revisions and other requirements, and duplicate publications were among the reasons for rejection **(Figure 1)**. We published four issues in 2022, and a total of 41 articles, which included 25 originals, 1 editorial, 2 reviews, 6 case reports, one case series, 1 clinical image, one clinical note, one brief communication, one correspondence, and 2 systematic reviews. The average processing time was 3.3 months from receipt to acceptance, 1.8 months from acceptance to publication, and 5.1 months from receipt to publication. However, the implementation of online continuous publications will significantly shorten the publication process. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and China contributed 63%, 10%, and 12.5% of the published articles, respectively, and Pakistan, Bahrain, Qatar, Austria, and Serbia contributed the remaining articles. ![Figure 1](http://nsj.org.sa/https://nsj.org.sa/content/nsj/28/1/1/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1](http://nsj.org.sa/content/28/1/1/F1) Figure 1 - Type of manuscripts received for the year 2022. ### Gratitude We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the reviewers, advisory boards, and editorial boards for providing insightful feedback, useful suggestions, and volunteer efforts to maintain the journal’s high standards. In addition, we would like to express our appreciation to our current and former staff for their dedication and commitment, and to our editors for their enthusiasm and zeal in promoting the journal locally and internationally. *Our thanks also go to the following reviewers, who have participated in the excellent review of manuscripts and books for the year 2022.* Aboonq, Moutasem Abualsaud, Dalya Abulaban, Ahmad* Aktas, Gulali Al-Baradie, Raidah* Al-Suwaidan, Faisal* Alattas, Alawi Alblowi, Mohammed Alhammad, Othman* Almandil, Noor B. Alotaibi, Faisal* Alrawaili, Saud Alshahri, Saeed Altamura, Claudia Arevalo, Miguel Baledent, Olivier Barik, Ramachandra* Barnawi, Abdulwahed* Bertolini, Gladson Ricardo Flor Besag, Frank M. C.* Bhat, Mohd Akbar Brigola, Allan Gustavo Ceccarelli, Antonia Chen, Qing Chopra, Sunil Chopra, Sunil Cilliler, Asli Ece Constantinescu, C. S. D’Amico, Emanuele Das, Undurti N. Dayoub, Nawal Elia, Maurizio* Erken, Ertugrul Gao, Bulang Gasparyan, Armen Yuri Grill, Jacques* Haunschild, Robin Hayashi, Yasuhiko Hiramatsu, Masafumi Isik, Kubra Islam, Md Rabiul Junior, Edward Araujo Kadooka, Keisuke Kashoo, Faizan Zaffar* Khatri, Ismail* Kirik, Serkan Kolev, Vasil Korinthenberg, Rudolf Lamba, Manika Long, Idris Mahesh, PKB Marar, Sumayyia D. Martucci, Gennaro Masri, Amira Mastronuzzi, Angela Matsuzono, Kosuke Mazicioglu, Mumtaz M. Mizutani, Katsuhiro Moccia, Marcello Nakhostin Ansari, Noureddin Negro, A. Nelson, Mary Elizabeth S. Noh, Mohamad Syafeeq Faeez Obeidat, Ahmed Z. Pant, Devesh Pellesi, Lanfranco Rai, Sachchida Nand* Riker, Richard R. Roldan-Valadez, Ernesto Rusu, Mugurel Constantin Saeedi, Jameela* Sami, Waqas Schernthaner, Gerit-Holger Simpson, Steve* Soliman, Mohamed AR Soman, Salil Tabarki, Brahim* Taly, Arun B. Tamam, Lut Toda, Hiroki Tomasi, S. Ottavio Tomaszewski, Christian Triunfo, Stefania Tsivgoulis, Georgios Tucker, Alexander M. Tufan, Ali Evren Verma, Rajesh Weiss, Margaret Danielle Yu, Jinlu Zardasti, Libriati Zhang, Hong-Liang* ## Footnotes * * *Reviewers who reviewed 2 or more articles for the year 2022* * Copyright: © Neurosciences Neurosciences is an Open Access journal and articles published are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (CC BY-NC). Readers may copy, distribute, and display the work for non-commercial purposes with the proper citation of the original work. ## References 1. 1.Kelly J, Sadeghieh T, Adeli K. Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide. EJIFCC 2014; 25: 227-243. [PubMed](http://nsj.org.sa/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fnsj%2F28%2F1%2F1.atom) 2. 2.Ware M. Peer Review: Benefits, Perceptions and Alternatives. PRC Summary Papers 2008; 4: 4-20. 3. 3.Publons ([clarivate.com](http://clarivate.com)) accessed date Dec 20, 2022 4. 4.Founding father of clarivate analytics’ web of science, Dr. Eugene Garfield dies at 91. Anatol J Cardiol 2017; 17: 348. 5. 5.Hundallah K, Khoja W. Editorial Message. Neurosciences Riyadh 2022; 27: 1-3. [FREE Full Text](http://nsj.org.sa/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoibnNqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjY6IjI3LzEvMSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjE2OiIvbnNqLzI4LzEvMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=)