Response to Guest Editorial (“ Veterinary Pathology Under the Microscope: Planning for the Future”)

Several interesting and important issues were raised in a recent editorial published in Veterinary Pathology regarding possible future directions and emphases of the ACVP/ECVP/JCVP’s official publication. ¹ One of the principal reasons for publishing Veterinary Pathology, as outlined in that editorial, is its indispensible role in disseminating scientific information that is relevant to the field of veterinary pathology and to practicing veterinary pathologists, veterinary pathologists in training, and nonpathologists alike. I applaud the establishment of a Strategic Planning Task Force that will produce a plan designed to ensure the continued success of the journal in what promises to be a challenging future in the world of scientific publications. The wide range of interests and needs of ACVP/ECVP/JCVP members makes this a daunting task and one that will have a large impact on the future of our specialty.

Perhaps the primary consideration is that as the official publication of the ACVP/ECVP/JCVP, Veterinary Pathology affects the image and prestige of our profession/specialty. Fairly or not, the inordinately weak impact factor of the journal probably does not influence perceptions of our specialty in a positive way. At the very least, on the basis of personal experiences with coauthors, I can attest that a weak impact factor does not encourage submission of some potentially important papers to Veterinary Pathology. In this regard, the large improvement in the journal’s impact factor in the past year reflects well on the concerted efforts of the journal editors to improve the quality of papers accepted for publication. As the editors continue this effort and if ACVP/ECVP/JCVP members will increase their support of the journal by submitting more of their best work for publication, it is very likely that a “virtuous cycle” can be established in which researchers are incentivized to submit their probable “high impact” papers to a journal having a higher impact factor. One of the challenges facing the Strategic Planning Task Force will be to figure out how to publish a journal with global importance that still provides real value to its supporting members. I believe that it is possible to reconcile the seemingly conflicting requirements to provide useful information for ACVP/ECVP/JCVP members having a wide range of professional interests and job requirements while simultaneously raising the profile of veterinary pathology and veterinary pathologists in the global biomedical research community. I believe that this is an achievable goal, but some changes will be necessary.

The strategic plan must continue to recognize and address the especially critical role that the journal plays in the training and continuing education of veterinary pathologists. Veterinary Pathology is one of the few existing venues in which detailed descriptive reports that focus on the pathology and/or pathogenesis of disease in animals can be published. Although veterinary pathologists often make valuable contributions to studies published in many different top-tier journals, the pathology itself is often shortchanged in those reports. The strict space constraints in many journals too often result in severely condensed pathology descriptions, generally accompanied by postage stamp–sized images that function more as colorful decorations felt necessary for a “real science” paper. In contrast, because Veterinary Pathology is published by organizations and editors that understand and appreciate the value of pathology, papers can include detailed morphologic descriptions of lesions, as well as high-quality images large enough to actually convey useful information. Following are some specific suggestions to consider in mapping a strategy to increase the impact factor of Veterinary Pathology, without negating the distinct services it provides to our profession.

There is no doubt that the fastest and perhaps easiest way to improve the journal’s impact factor would be to simply stop publishing case reports. It is clear that those scientific journals that publish large numbers of individual case reports invariably have low impact factors for the simple reason that case reports are rarely cited. However, there is also no question that impact factor calculations understate the true value of case reports, especially to clinicians and diagnostic pathologists. Well-written case reports that incorporate condensed reviews of current literature can provide a wealth of information on the incidence, pathogenesis, and differential diagnoses for common/uncommon diseases in animals, precisely the type of information that has tremendous education value to practicing and aspiring veterinarians and veterinary pathologists alike. To continue making this valuable information accessible without negatively affecting the impact factor of Veterinary Pathology would require the establishment of a separate online journal dedicated to the publication of Veterinary Pathology case reports. The format of case reports could be standardized, perhaps following a model similar to that used by the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology for Wednesday Slide Conferences. An online journal would allow abundant space for gross and microscopic pathology illustrations. Moreover, an Internet-based platform would provide opportunities for postpublication reviews and comment by readers that would be especially useful for sharing knowledge. The considerable administrative burden normally imposed on conventional print journals by editorial functions and peer review could be substantially reduced or even discarded without completely eliminating quality control by requiring either review or authorship by a board-certified veterinary pathologist. Of course, the prohibition of case reports in Veterinary Pathology would not apply to case series having significant implications on the diagnosis, prognosis, or pathogenesis of important clinical entities or disease models.

As recently demonstrated, editorial decisions and actions can affect the impact factor. The journal editor has encouraged members to submit papers that they know are likely to have higher impact. I know from personal experience that the journal editors and staff will expedite the review and prepublication production processes when requested and justified. Although a journal’s impact factor is a major consideration in deciding where to publish, the anticipated length of time required from submission to publication is sometimes even more important than a journal’s impact factor. A provision for “rapid communications,” which would accommodate shorter, potentially high-impact papers in Veterinary Pathology, might be considered, but a continued emphasis on rapid turnaround of all manuscripts by journal staff and reviewers is extremely important.

The types of papers selected for publication can have a major effect on a journal’s impact factor. Some of the journals that have the highest impact factors focus entirely on reviews of current literature. I do not think that it would be wise to try to compete with better-established review journals on general topics, but a quick look at the most highly cited articles published in Veterinary Pathology and Toxicologic Pathology suggests that review papers describing animal models of important diseases of humans are most useful to the scientific community. Methods papers are also highly cited and are extremely useful to practicing veterinary pathologists, who are often asked to collaborate on projects using animal model systems with which they may initially be unfamiliar. For example, there are several widely used models in immunology (such as collagen-induced arthritis, experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, inflammatory bowel disease, experimental autoimmune uveitis) for which consensus position papers on recommended approaches for pathological analysis are lacking but would be highly valuable. A similar approach to that used by the Society of Toxicologic Pathology in developing “recommended practices” could be used to draft and review methods papers that describe in detail the best ways to process and grade (semiquantitative or by image analysis) pathological changes in a wide variety of assays. Standardization of this type would be of immense value to pathologists new to a specific model and would allow more valid comparisons of findings from different laboratories. Similarly, methods papers that outline best procedures for diagnostic pathologists in making accurate definitive diagnoses in cases where clinical signs or lesions are not pathognomonic.

In the editorial that prompted this response, a question asked is “Can the needs of veterinary pathologists practicing in academic and research laboratories, industry, and government, and challenging environments in developing areas of the world be met by the same journal?” The answer of course is “No way! It is not possible to publish a journal completely filled with papers of interest to the even a majority of ACVP/ECVP/JCVP members.” Realistically, the only people that consistently read the journal cover to cover are those studying for board certification examinations (bless them!). However, it is entirely within our power to publish a journal that can make all of us proud by increasing the visibility and prestige of veterinary pathology in the biomedical sciences and can make all of us happy by providing up-to-date information on the best methods available to pathologists to evaluate lesions and diagnose disease in animals.