I decided to apply for the William R. Eyler
Fellowship during the winter of 2008. There were at least three reasons for my
application. First, I was the editor in chief of Radiología, the official journal of the Spanish Society of
Radiology. Although after 4 years of experience I was quite used to the job, I
considered it desirable to create benchmarks and to learn from the top journals
and the top society in the field. Second, I thought the fellowship would
provide me with valuable acquaintances and sources of knowledge for the future.
Finally, I was sure that the experience would be of merit not only to me but to
Radiología as well. I felt surprised and
moved when I received the decision letter. It felt like a major achievement.
The Fellowship filled the month of November
2009. My first visit was 2 days at the RadioGraphics
office. Thereafter, I enjoyed 2 weeks in the Radiology office. Next I went to the RSNA Headquarters for a 2-day
stay; finally, during the last week of my fellowship, I attended the RSNA
Annual Meeting. At this point, I must express my gratitude to my Radiology
Department, the Directive Board of the University General Hospital Morales
Meseguer in Murcia, Spain, and, in particular, my family. Their wholehearted support was invaluable.
I was introduced to my fellowship by Dr Olmsted,
who from the very first made me feel comfortable. Dr Olmsted explained the rationale
of the fellowship and how important it is for the publications of the RSNA. Dr
Olmsted made available to me a number of books dealing with scientific
journalism and the editor’s job. He continued by reviewing the structure of the
RSNA and the publications direction. He then explained to me the mission of RadioGraphics and, with the assistance of
Ms Cindy Rogers, I was led to understand how closely the journal relates with
the educational presentations in the RSNA Annual Meeting, and, through them, the
readers’ preferences. I logged in to the RadioGraphics
electronic editorial tool (RGXPress) with
Ms Wendy Morris. Finally, Dr Olmsted and I reviewed the RadioGraphics website, discussed ideas for the future of RadioGraphics as an online journal, and,
very briefly, set out some issues on ethics in scientific medical publications.
I must emphasize that Dr Olmsted has, over the
course of some 20 years, tried to reduce personal distances as much as possible
within the RadioGraphics office—a small
family is how he sees the team. He has beyond doubt succeeded, as I can attest
through my experience of the working atmosphere and the friendliness of the
office staff.
Next, came 2 weeks in Boston at the Radiology Editorial Office. Dr Kressel introduced
me to the staff of the Radiology
office, including Dr Levine, Senior Deputy Editor, and they all had a brief
breakfast with me in the meeting room. The 2 weeks in Boston allowed me to gain
valuable insights into the review, editorial decision-making, and revision
processes for Radiology manuscripts.
I could define this part of the fellow’s job as the basic task. I became aware
of the exhaustive and often complex way all the steps are performed. I witnessed
the different roles that reviewers, deputy editors, and editor in chief
throughout the peer review process. As a reviewer and circumstantial deputy
editor, I performed reviews and revisions of revised manuscripts. I retain the
valuable learning I gained thanks to the interesting postreview and
postrevision discussions with Drs Kressel and Levine.
Of
particular interest to me was the opportunity to participate in the weekly
Deputy Editors’ meeting, where manuscripts being considered for publication in Radiology after peer review were
discussed. What I found especially useful in these meetings was the chance to
observe the editor’s philosophy and how he weighed anticipated scientific
impact over a manuscript’s shortcomings; he usually prevailed over the deputy editor’s
decision should any disagreement arise.
I
also had the opportunity to discuss, mostly with Dr Kressel but also with Dr
Bankier, a deputy editor, ethical issues related to medical publications, especially
redundant and fraudulent publication and conflicts of interest. We also discussed
other important issues such as authorship and how to deal with disgruntled
authors. I had the opportunity to explore statistical topics and the review
carried out by the journal’s statisticians. As was the case in Bethesda, I also
found substantial value in more informal discussions with the editors and
related persons in the office, at dinners, and elsewhere, all of which enriched
me so much.
An “RSNA welcomes Dr. García Santos” panel awaited me on November 23 when
the doors of the elevator opened on the second floor of the RSNA building. This
was not insignificant. It was the presentation card of one of the most
surprising parts of the fellowship: the visit to the RSNA Publications
Department.
I had
been picked up at my hotel by Ms Roberta Arnold, RSNA Assistant Executive
Director for Publications and Communications. At the RSNA Headquarters, I had a
very competently organized visit focused on many characteristics of the RSNA
journals, ranging from the peer review process to the economics and through
copyediting. For example, I had not previously imagined the out-of-sight but
dedicated work leading to the outstanding quality of images in Radiology and RadioGraphics pages. Certainly, quality doesn’t arise by
spontaneous generation! I had an extremely interesting meeting with Ms Sue
Harmon and Mr John Humpal about copy editing, a journalism topic in which I’m
especially interested. As today’s medical journal contents are mainly transmitted
by means of real or virtual printed pages, scientific journalism is not only a
question of science but of written language as well. Through Ms Harmon and Mr
Humpal and the copy editors thereafter, I became aware of the massive effort
behind the pages of the printed and online versions of the RSNA journals. The
RSNA is lucky to rely on these and other professionals, who retain such a level
of commitment after so many years doing the job.
Although
I usually reach RadioGraphics and Radiology through PubMed and read the
journals via the printed page, after my fellowship I will be much more inclined
to access these publications via their websites. In addition to ecology, the nice
design, high interactive potential, upcoming novelties and endless
possibilities of the Websites are powerful reasons to invest in on-line
journals.
My
responsibilities during the Annual Meeting were basically two-fold: to play a
role as a RadioGraphics panelist and
to attend breakfast and luncheons of both journals dedicated to their reviewers
and editorial board. As a RadioGraphics
panelist I dedicated a substantial part of my time during the meeting to reviewing
the presentations I had been assigned.
I
want to give thanks to Dr. Sarah Donaldson and the RSNA Board of Directors for
the great honor I was awarded; to Mrs. Roberta Arnold, in representation of all
the RSNA publications staff at the RSNA Headquarters; and to Dr. Herbert
Kressel, Dr. Deborah Levine and Dr. William Olmsted, editors of the RSNA
journals, for their kind attention and the time they invested in my education
as a fellow. I will keep this experience forever.
José M. García Santos,
MD
RSNA William R. Eyler Editorial Fellow 2009