Commentary Evaluation Criteria for Publishing in Top-Tier Journals in Environmental Health Sciences and Toxicology Byung-Mu Lee College of Pharmacy, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, South Korea Background : Trying to publish a paper in a top-rated peer-reviewed journal can be a difficult and frustrating experience for authors. It is important that authors understand the general review pro- cess before submitting manuscripts for publication. o Bjectivs : Editors-in-chief and associate editors from top-tier journals such as Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), Toxicological Sciences, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, and Chemical Research in Toxicology were asked to provide guidance concerning the writing and submission of papers to their journals. d iscuon : The editors reviewed the manuscript review process for their journals, elaborated on the evaluation criteria for reviewing papers, and provided advice for future authors in preparing their papers. c isulcno : The manuscript submission process was similar for all of the journals with the excep- tion of EHP that includes an initial screening in which about two-thirds of submitted papers are returned to the authors without review. The evaluation criteria used by the journals were also similar. words Papers that are relevant to the scope of the journal, are innovative, significantly advance the field, are well written, and adhere to the instructions to authors have a higher likelihood of being accepted. The editors advised potential authors to ensure that the topic of the paper is within the scope of the jour- nal, represents an important problem, is carefully prepared according to the instructions to authors, and to seek editorial assistance if English is not the primary language of the authors. k ey : environmental health sciences, evaluation criteria, peer review, top-tier journals, toxicology. Environ Health Perspect 119:896–899 (2011). doi:10.1289/ehp.1003280 [Online 17 March 2011] Environmental health sciences is the study of how various biological, physical, or chemical factors influence the health of humans and their surroundings. Research in this area is increasingly multidisciplinary and includes a number of related fields such as toxicol- ogy, exposure science, and epidemiology. Environmental health research provides the scientific basis for developing public health strategies to protect human health and approaches to promote a sustainable environ- ment. One of the primary sources of scientific information that is available to researchers and policy makers is the peer-reviewed literature. Publishing scientific information is also clearly important to researchers in academia, government, and industry. Their careers and their organizations are highly dependent on publishing their findings in the best journals possible. Many scientists have little difficulty designing and conducting experiments, but they tend not to be as successful in getting their work published in a highly rated peer- reviewed journal. Editors of such journals often receive complaints from authors express- ing concerns about the peer-review process, especially the quality of the reviews. Many authors wonder why the rejection rate varies so much across journals. The acceptance rate for a journal such as Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) is about 20% (Tilson H, personal communication), whereas the accep- tance rate for other journals can be as high as 50%. Most editors of journals would agree 896 that the rejection rate for papers from devel- oping countries is higher than for those from developed countries. The reasons for this disparity are not clear but may relate to the fact that most top-tier journals are written in English. This may be problematic for some authors who use English as a second language. In May 2010, the Korean Society of Toxicology sponsored an international work- shop that was held in Seoul, Korea titled “The Way to Top-Tiered Journals in Toxicology.” Editors from EHP, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (JPET), Chemical Research in Toxicology (CRT), and Toxicological Sciences (Toxicol Sci) were invited to discuss their manuscript review processes and the criteria used to accept or reject papers. These journals receive about 1,000 papers per year and have acceptance rates of 18–50%; their 2009 impact factors ranged from 3.74 to 6.19 (Table 1). The overall goal of the work- shop was to provide an understanding of the journal review process in detail in order to improve the quality of papers submitted to scientific journals. Summary of the Manuscript Review Process The manuscript review processes for the jour- nals represented at the workshop were simi- lar, with one major difference: EHP uses an initial screening process where approximately two-thirds of the papers received are returned to the authors without review. Once a paper has passed this screening process, EHP uses a group of consulting editors to decide if the paper is within the scope of the journal and to provide an initial evaluation of the paper for innovativeness, scientific quality, environ- mental relevance, and clarity. Adherence to the instructions for preparing the manuscript, such as word limits, is also assessed at this time. For all journals represented at the work- shop, papers selected for review are assigned to an editor or associate editor, who contacts the peer reviewers and manages the actual review of the paper. These editors usually make a rec- ommendation to the editor-in-chief concern- ing the acceptability of a manuscript. Most journals have a board of associate editors and an editorial review board, composed of lead- ing scientists with established reputations in the discipline covered in the paper, to assist in the peer-review process. These scientists are intricately involved in the review process, and the quality of the published papers depends heavily on their input. Summary of Evaluation Criteria The evaluation criteria applied by the various journals were also remarkably similar. Scope of the journal. For EHP, it is important that the research be relevant to human health. Toxicology studies involv- ing in vitro or animal models also must be pertinent to human health. If the study is mechanistically oriented, the end points or indicators must be relevant in humans. If the study concerns wildlife or the environ- ment, the relationship to human health or human activities must be clear. EHP has a history of publishing papers concerning the effects of environmentally relevant chemicals (e.g., air pollutants, flame retardants, dioxins, and polychlorinated biphenyls, bisphenol A) on human health or susceptible populations such as children or the elderly. Much of the work published in EHP is multidisciplinary. Address correspondence to Byung-Mu Lee, Division of Toxicology, College of Pharmacy, Sungkyunkwan U n i v e r s i t y , C h u n c h u n - d o n g 3 0 0 , S u w o n , Gyeonggi-do, 440-746, South Korea, Telephone: 82-31-290-7708. Fax: 82-31-290-7728. E-mail: bmlee@skku.edu Support for the international workshop titled “The Way to Top-Tiered Journals in Toxicology” held in May 2010 in Seoul, South Korea, was provided by the Korean Society of Toxicology. The author declares he has no actual or potential competing financial interests. Received 1 December 2010; accepted 16 March 2011. ovlume 119 | number 7 | July 2011 • Environmental Health Perspectives