{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02097672894133071, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006555227794165847, 'mean_word_length': 4.802281368821292, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The journey to publication

The last two years as the Joint Editor-in-Chief, with executive responsibility for the production of the Journal, has been busy and rewarding with lots to learn. During this period, we have moved from four to six issues with relentlessly reappearing deadlines! No sooner is one issue put to bed than work starts on the next. As the process of publishing a journal issue may seem to an outsider something of a mystery, and the time from submission to publication lengthy, we thought it would be helpful to explain what often happens to your papers and how the process works. The editorial team based in the Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences (Kingston University and St George’s, University of London), and the production team at Informa work hard to ensure that throughput is as efficient as possible. Submissions to the Journal have more than doubled over the last 18 months, although there is an interesting seasonal variation. Following a predictable lull in August, when authors are taking time out, there is a flurry of activity during the later autumn months. When your paper arrives in the editorial office (see flow chart in Figure 1), it is first acknowledged by the editorial administrator and then it goes to FR for screening to ensure the subject meets the aims of the Journal, that it has been formatted correctly (see Notes for Contributors in each issue) and for a general assessment of quality. Very few are rejected at this point and most go forward to review. Selecting and then confirming two reviewers, one of whom is normally from outside the UK, who both have the expertise and the time to review, often takes longer than anticipated. Reviewing is an unpaid task that academics and professionals do in the midst of busy working lives, which can take longer than is desirable. When both reviews have been received, the manuscript and reviews are sent to either the Editor or one of the Associate Editors, who evaluates the reviewers’ comments and informs the author of the decision to accept without revision, with minor or major revision, reject or invite resubmission as a short report. Time taken by authors to revise and resubmit manuscripts is, of course, outside our control, but we encourage as quick a turn-round as practicable. On receipt of a revised manuscript the appropriate Associate Editor reviews the extent to which the changes have sufficiently addressed the reviewers’ concerns. We do not routinely send papers back for rereview, this will only occur if the reviewer has requested it or there are remaining concerns about quality. The revised manuscript is subjected to a thorough final editorial review by the responsible Editor and then checked in the editorial office by the administrator before sending it to the publisher’s production team. Currently our average time from submission to publication is 8.7 months, which compares well with other similar journals. We reject about 28% of all papers received. Journal of Interprofessional Care, March 2007; 21(2): 125 – 128