Bringing results to fruition through publication: An analysis of a peer-reviewed, open access and context-focused journal's editorial practice

When it comes to helping to shape sustainable development, research is most useful when it bridges the science–implementation/management gap and when it brings development specialists and researchers into a dialogue (Hurni et al. 2004); can a peer-reviewed journal contribute to this aim? In the classical system for validation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, journals focus on knowledge exchange within the academic community and do not specifically address a ‘life-world audience’. Within a North-South context, another knowledge divide is added: the peer review process excludes a large proportion of scientists from the South from participating in the production of scientific knowledge (Karlsson et al. 2007). Mountain Research and Development (MRD) is a journal whose mission is based on an editorial strategy to build the bridge between research and development and ensure that authors from the global South have access to knowledge production, ultimately with a view to supporting sustainable development in mountains. In doing so, MRD faces a number of challenges that we would like to discuss with the td-net community, after having presented our experience and strategy as editors of this journal. MRD was launched in 1981 by mountain researchers who wanted mountains to be included in the 1992 Rio process. In the late 1990s, MRD realized that the journal needed to go beyond addressing only the scientific community. It therefore launched a new section addressing a broader audience in 2000, with the aim of disseminating insights into, and recommendations for, the implementation of sustainable development in mountains. In 2006, we conducted a survey among MRD’s authors, reviewers, and readers (Wymann et al. 2007): respondents confirmed that MRD had succeeded in bridging the gap between research and development. But we realized that MRD could become an even more efficient tool for sustainability if development knowledge were validated: in 2009, we began submitting ‘development’ papers (‘transformation knowledge’) to external peer review of a kind different from the scientific-only peer review (for ‘systems knowledge’). At the same time, the journal became open access in order to increase the permeability between science and society, and ensure greater access for readers and authors in the South. We are currently rethinking our review process for development papers, with a view to creating more space for communication between science and society, and enhancing the co-production of knowledge (Roux 2008). Hopefully, these efforts will also contribute to the urgent debate on the ‘publication culture’ needed in transdisciplinary research (Kueffer et al. 2007).

Impact factor statistics and publication practice: What can we learn? (Editorial)

Peer review procedures and citation statistics are important yet often neglected components of the scientific publication process. Here I discuss fundamental consequences of such quality measures for the scientific community and propose three remedial actions: (1) use of a ''Combined Impact Estimate'' as a measure of citation statistics, (2) adoption of an open reviewing policy and (3) acceleration of the publication process in order to raise the reputation of the entire discipline (in our case: behavioural science). Authors, reviewers and editors are invited to contribute to the improvement of publication practice.

Co-occurring addictive and psychiatric disorders. A practice-based handbook from a european perspective

This book provides a comprehensive, state of the art overview covering both the diagnosis and the treatment of dual disorders – joint psychiatric and substance use disorders – in a way that is highly relevant to clinical work and the organization of health care systems. It is designed to meet the real need for an European perspective on dual disorders, taking into account the realities of European treatment organization. All chapters have been written by European authors and, in addition to a comprehensive overview of the specific topics, highlight available European treatment programs, guidelines and European research. Dual disorders are increasingly encountered by health professionals working in mental health and addiction care, and they represent a formidable challenge for caregivers, care organizations, and society as a whole. During the past decade, various approaches and programs have been designed to challenge the traditional gap between addiction treatment and mental health care. The overwhelming majority of the programs, however, have emanated from the United States. Given the vast differences between the European and U.S. health contexts, it can be questioned whether these American oriented treatment programs can seamlessly be implemented in European countries. Therefore, Co-occuring Addictive and Psychiatric Disorders – A Practice-Based Handbook from a European Perspective represents a timely and much needed addition to literature on dual disorders.

Uterine torsion in Brown Swiss cattle: retrospective analysis from an alpine practice in Switzerland

The incidence of uterine torsion in cattle is 0.5–1 per cent of all calvings and up to 30 per cent of all dystocia cases (Berchtold and Rüsch 1993). The unstable suspension of the bovine uterus is a predisposition cited by different authors (Pearson 1971, Schulz and others 1975, Berchtold and Rüsch 1993). Age of the cow, season and weight and sex of the calf have been inconsistently reported to be associated with uterine torsion (Distl 1991, Frazer and others 1996, Tamm 1997). Small amount of fetal fluids and a large abdomen may contribute to uterine torsion (Berchtold and Rüsch 1993). Furthermore, some authors describe a predisposition in the Brown Swiss breed (Distl 1991, Schmid 1993, Frazer and others 1996) and in cows kept in alpine regions (Schmid 1993). Uterine torsion is predominantly seen under parturition, and the degree of torsion is most often between 180° and 360°. The direction is counter-clockwise in 60–90 per cent of the cases (Pearson 1971, Berchtold and Rüsch 1993, Erteld and others 2012). Vaginal delivery is possible after manual detorsion or after rolling of the cow, whereas caesarean section has to be performed after unsuccessful detorsion or if the cervix is not dilating adequately following successful correction of the torsion (Berchtold and Rüsch 1993, Frazer and others 1996). Out of all veterinary-assisted dystocia cases, 20 per cent (Aubry and others 2008) to 30 per cent (Berchtold and Rüsch 1993) are due to uterine torsion. Many publications describe fertility variables after dystocia, but only Schönfelder and coworkers described that 40 per cent of the cows got pregnant after uterine torsion followed by caesarean section (Schönfelder and Sobiraj 2005).

Serious Play as a Practice of Paradox

A recent stream of organizational research has used the term serious play to describe situations in which people engage in playful behaviors deliberately with the intention to achieve serious, work-related objectives. In this article, the authors reflect on the ambiguity of this term, and reframe serious play as a practice characterized by the paradox of intentionality (when actors engage deliberately in a fun, intrinsically motivating activity as a means to achieve a serious, extrinsically motivated work objective). This reframing not only extends the explanatory power of the concept of serious play but also helps bridge the concerns of scholars and practitioners: first, by enabling us to understand a variety of activities in organizations as serious play, which can help practitioners address specific organizational challenges; second, by recognizing the potential for emergent serious play, and the creation of the conditions to foster this emergence; third, by pointing toward specific, individual or group-level outcomes associated with the practice; and finally, by uncovering its ethical dimensions and encouraging the understanding of the role of serious play on ethical decision making.

Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation should become the standard practice in coronary revascularization surgery†.

We read with great interest the large-scale network meta-analysis by Kowalewski et al. comparing clinical outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operated on using minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) or off-pump (OPCAB) with those undergoing surgery on conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) [1]. The authors actually integrated into single study two recently published meta-analysis comparing MiECC and OPCAB with conventional CPB, respectively [2, 3] into a single study. According to the results of this study, MiECC and OPCAB are both strongly associated with improved perioperative outcomes following CABG when compared with CABG performed on conventional CPB. The authors conclude that MiECC may represent an attractive compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB. After carefully reading the whole manuscript, it becomes evident that the role of MiECC is clearly undervalued. Detailed statistical analysis using the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities indicated that MiECC represented the safer and more effective intervention regarding all-cause mortality and protection from myocardial infarction, cerebral stroke, postoperative atrial fibrillation and renal dysfunction when compared with OPCAB. Even though no significant statistical differences were demonstrated between MiECC and OPCAB, the superiority of MiECC is obvious by the hierarchy of treatments in the probability analysis, which ranked MiECC as the first treatment followed by OPCAB and conventional CPB. Thus, MiECC does not represent a compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB, but an attractive dominant technique in CABG surgery. These results are consistent with the largest published meta-analysis by Anastasiadis et al. comparing MiECC versus conventional CPB including a total of 2770 patients. A significant decrease in mortality was observed when MiECC was used, which was also associated with reduced risk of postoperative myocardial infarction and neurological events [4]. Similarly, another recent meta-analysis by Benedetto et al. compared MiECC versus OPCAB and resulted in comparable outcomes between these two surgical techniques [5]. As stated in the text, superiority of MiECC observed in the current network meta-analysis, when compared with OPCAB, could be attributed to the fact that MiECC offers the potential for complete revascularization, whereas OPCAB poses a challenge for unexperienced surgeons; especially when distal marginal branches on the lateral and/or posterior wall of the heart need revascularization. This is reflected by a significantly lower number of distal anastomoses performed in OPCAB when compared with conventional CPB. Therefore, taking into consideration the literature published up to date, including the results of the current article, we advocate that MiECC should be integrated in the clinical practice guidelines as a state-of-the-art technique and become a standard practice for perfusion in coronary revascularization surgery.