Abstract
In the brief period of time that I have been Editor of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry (ANZJP). I have already been asked several times “What will the Journal publish?” This is not an unreasonable question since it is ultimately an editorial responsibility to provide direction for the content of the Journal and more specifically, decide what to publish and when. However, at this stage, though clearly important, I have not addressed the question of content per se but will deal with this more comprehensively in a future editorial. Instead I have briefly outlined a number of considerations pertaining to the Journal and articles that will be published in its pages.
Discovery: Defining psychiatric disorders, identifying their causes and developing effective remedies are amongst the most pressing challenges facing researchers. However, because these endeavours have proven difficult, and thus far relatively little progress has been made, opportunities for making genuine psychiatric discoveries abound. In fact it is this possibility that makes research in psychiatry truly exciting. Gaining new insight, making the first clinical observation, or identifying novel mechanisms of action are intrinsically unparalleled experiences, for researchers and clinicians alike. It is these types of discovery or at least aspects of these processes that the Journal will attempt to capture. Realistically, authors of articles describing breakthroughs and headline making advances are unlikely to target the ANZJP. Understandably journals such as the Lancet, Science and Nature will be deemed more suitable for such ‘news’. But prior to the last piece of a jigsaw puzzle falling into place and the completed picture taking form, there are often many other key pieces of information that have been equally important, if not more so, in making a solution possible. It is these ‘pieces’ that the Journal will aim to identify and publish, specifically studies and experiments that have the potential to lead to, or form the foundation of, future discoveries. But how will such articles be identified? Clearly this is a challenge in itself, but one that can perhaps be better negotiated by requesting authors consider these aspects of their research in advance. Ideally this should be done within the body of any article submitted to the Journal and emphasised in the accompanying cover letter. For instance, many research articles focus on a single result and devote all their effort to substantiating this finding and ‘boosting confidence’ in a particular outcome. Such papers often over-emphasise the statistical significance of analytical tests and the strength of their scientific method. Of course, in order for research to be published in the ANZJP, it has to be methodologically robust and statistically sound however, rather than solely labouring this aspect, articles could instead attempt to better link their findings to those of their contemporaries in the field. This would provide a useful backdrop for readers and allow them to better appreciate the full significance and meaning of the scientific findings. For example, a report of an unusual statistic regarding the prevalence of a particular disorder, either in a unique population or setting, could, in addition to detailing the significance of the finding, discuss the context of the statistic and its salience to both researchers and clinicians. Again the implications of the finding for the field and ideas for future exploration could also be included, and where possible authors can perhaps extrapolate and posit new hypotheses. Ultimately, it is the consequences and impact of the findings that matter. In every piece of research, it is the “So what?” question that needs to be asked and then satisfactorily answered. When reporting scientific findings researchers often forget that experimental outcomes though automatically of interest are not always interesting, at least not to everyone. Authors should therefore consider reporting their findings in a manner that not only generates and maintains interest in their article during the time it is being digested, but one that ensures ongoing enthusiasm for their research when it is eventually regurgitated in publications and conference presentations. Perhaps most important however, is the need to invoke future interest in the subject matter that triggers further inquiry. This in turn encourages reappraisal and replication of research and it is in this capacity that the ANZJP can assist in laying down a twenty-first century foundation for psychiatry.
Debate: Amongst medical specialties, psychiatry offers the greatest scope for discussion. This is because in psychiatry few things if any have been determined with certainty. For instance, psychiatric diagnoses are far from fixed and the underlying pathology of most psychiatric disorders remains largely unknown. Hence current treatment practices in psychiatry are essentially symptomatic and at best only occasionally effective. This humbling state of affairs is partly attributable to our inability to accurately identify and classify disorders with consistency. This may be a reflection of the very nature of diseases that manifest within psychiatry however; at present we have no way of knowing. This then is fertile ground for dialogue, discussion and debate, and articles that tackle contemporary ideas and contentious issues in psychiatry and in doing so provide useful insights, will feature in the Journal. Opinion can be accommodated alongside science and readers are invited to share their thoughts via Correspondence. More in depth analyses are perhaps better articulated when supported by evidence or contextualized with reference to the views of other leading proponents in the field. Editorials provide a useful format for such ‘commentary’ and those wishing to articulate their views through scholarship are encouraged to do so. From time to time the Journal will also invite such articles on topical issues and attempt to publish a range of opinions that reflect the diversity within psychiatry. However, debate should not be limited to editorial and correspondence sections of the Journal and authors of original research and review articles may also consider discussing alternate perspectives, views and interpretations that challenge the zeitgeist in light of their findings. Within its pages the ANZJP is therefore perfectly poised to provide a versatile forum for scientific discourse that facilitates the exposition of pertinent issues across all aspects of psychiatry.
Dissemination: The Journal is distributed to Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists members and is subscribed to by leading institutions worldwide. In addition, online access and indexing in international databases further guarantees that its messages are disseminated widely and reach a global audience. In the 21st century the rate of discovery is likely to be greater than ever before because of technological advances and the ability to transmit information ‘instantaneously’. The communication of novel findings is fundamental to the spawning of ideas and the inception of concepts and it is this sharing of knowledge that accelerates scientific progress and facilitates understanding.
In this regard the ANZJP already publishes articles early online and this process will be expedited further, especially for original research. Therefore where appropriate authors should consider requesting ‘rapid publication’ of their research papers provided they are confident that this is warranted. It should be noted however, that reviewers and editors alike, seldom look kindly upon exaggerated claims. As a rule of thumb, if the findings of a study don't speak for themselves and persuasive argument is required to make the case, then expedited publishing is perhaps unnecessary.
Ultimately, it is necessary that we continue to make advances in psychiatry, discuss their implications for research and for the management of our patients, and inform each other of what we think.