---------- Forwarded message ---------- List-Post: goal@eprints.org List-Post: goal@eprints.org Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 09:20:51 -0400 From: "Phelps, Charles" <cphe...@admin.rochester.edu> To: 'Stevan Harnad' <har...@coglit.ecs.soton.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Arnold Relman's NEJM Editorial about NIH/E-biomed
Steve, I am really enjoying this ongoing dialog you've created. Thanks for doing it and carrying on the discussion. I am returning this to you alone, since I don't know who all your email lists go to, but I'd be happy to have you send this out to whomever you think appropriate. (It is not intended as a letter to the NEJM however). Discussion follows: In part it helps for those not familiar with Dr. Relman and the standing of the NEJM to understand their position. They have a market stature so great that it dominates all other medical journals, and probably all other journals in the world (possibly only excluding Science and Nature). Their citation index is about 20 per article; the next best (in a not too recent look) was JAMA at 12. Most other journals are in the realm of 2 - 4 or lower in the field. Thus the NEJM has an extraordinary stature and power that they are obviously loathe to give up. The new medium threatens them more than any other publisher/journal. Dr. Relman (and his predecessor, Franz Ingelfinger, MD) carved in stone what was once known as the Ingelfinger Rule, which is now commonplace: "We won't consider a manuscript for publication in the NEJM if it's been published elsewhere." They have a very strict definition of "elsewhere" to include all sorts of things that many people would not consider publication. Their current stature and the tight control of pre-release of content are self reinforcing under current rules. They highlight "top" articles with a concurrent editorial ("commentary") and often a press release. This keeps NEJM articles in high visibility and they are (because of the very high and hence attractive stature of the journal and very stringent refereeing standards) of very high quality generally. Obviously the NIH proposal threatens a part of this because the immediate newsworthiness of documents already available on an e - server diminishes. Yet a widespread and widely used NIH system would make it impossible for the NEJM to boycott manuscripts placed on the e-server (just as the physics journals could not boycott articles posted on Los Alamos). This is the major source of Dr. Relman's concern. Charles E. Phelps, Provost University of Rochester 200 Wallis Hall Rochester, NY 14627 Voice: 716 - 275 - 5931 Fax: 716 - 461 - 1046 email: cphe...@admin.rochester.edu