Ophthalmology Journals

The word “ journal” has originated from latin word “diurnalis” which means daily.To us journal means a collection of scientic articles.There are various types of journals.For scientists & reseachers the most accepted journals are mostly peer reviewed journal Peer review is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work or research to the scrutiny of other experts in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review.

What is impact factor ?

The impact factor is a measure of the citations to science and social science journals. The Impact factor was introduced by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI).
The impact factor of a journal is calculated every two-year period. It can be obtained by the average number of citations in a year given to those papers in a journal that were published during the two preceding years. For example, the 2008 impact factor of a journal would be calculated as follows:
A = the number of times articles published in 2006-2007 were cited in indexed journals during 2008
B = the number of "citable items" published in 2006-2007

2008 impact factor of the journal will be= A/B

Full list of Ophthalmology Journals ranked by Impact Factor 2013 Click Here

What is ISSN of a journal ?

ISSN stands for International Standard Serial Number. ISSN is a unique eight-digit number used to identify a periodical publication. It is internationally accepted as a fundamental identifier for distinguishing between identical serial titles and facilitating checking and ordering procedures, collection management, legal deposit, interlibrary loans etc. These ISSN codes are assigned by a network of ISSN National centers, usually located at national libraries and coordinated by the ISSN International Centre based in Paris. The ISSN Network has assigned more than 1.7 million ISSN and it increases by approximately 60,000 to 70,000 ISSNs per year. Website: http://www.issn.or

What is a Peer Reviewed Journal ?

Peer review is a process of scrutinizing an author's scholarly research workby people, who are experts in the same field.  The credit for first documented peer review process goes to Henry Oldenburg, the founding editor of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1665. The present-day peer review system evolved from Medical Essays and Observations published by the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1731.

Importance of peer-reviewed process:
Normally, the decision to publish or reject an article or work lies with the editor of the journal to which the manuscript has been submitted. Here comes the importance of peer-review process. Peer review is used  primarily for three reasons:

Huge Workload.
It is an impossible for one editor and few subeditors to devote sufficient time to each of the works or articles submitted to a journal.

Differences of opinion
There may be differences of opinion to judge all submitted material so the peer review process

Limited expertise.
It is not possible for an editor or subeditors to expertise in all areas or subjects of a journal.

Furthermore, the decision whether or not to publish a scholarly article, or what should be modified before publication, lies with the editor of the journal to which the manuscript has been submitted. Thus it is normal for manuscripts and grant proposals to be sent to one or more external reviewers for comment.

Reviewers or peer-reviewed process:
 peer-reviewed processare usually anonymous and independent which eliminates the bias involved in this process.
Since reviewers are normally selected from experts in the fields discussed in the article, the process of peer review is considered critical to establishing a reliable body of research and knowledge. Scholars reading the published articles can only be expert in a limited area; they rely, to some degree, on the peer-review process to provide reliable and credible research that they can build upon for subsequent or related research. (Known as "referees" or "reviewers"),

Click here for the list of Ophthalmology Journals

The process:
In the case of proposed publications, an editor sends advance copies of an author's work or ideas to experts in that particular field (known as "referees" or "reviewers"),

These referees each return an evaluation of the work to the editor, noting weaknesses or problems along with suggestions for improvement. Typically, most of the referees' comments are eventually seen by the author; scientific journals observe this convention universally. The editor, usually familiar with the field of the manuscript (although typically not in as much depth as the referees, who are specialists), then evaluates the referees' comments, her or his own opinion of the manuscript, and the context of the scope of the journal or level of the book and readership, before passing a decision back to the author(s), usually with the referees' comments.
Referees' evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the manuscript or proposal, often chosen from options provided by the journal or funding agency. Most recommendations are along the lines of the following:

•to unconditionally accept the manuscript or proposal,
•to accept it in the event that its authors improve it in certain ways,
•to reject it, but encourage revision and invite resubmission,
•to reject it outright.


Figure: Process of Peerreview (Click to enlarge the image)

In situations where the referees disagree substantially about the quality of a work, there are a number of strategies for reaching a decision. When an editor receives very positive and very negative reviews for the same manuscript, the editor often will solicit one or more additional reviews as a tie-breaker. As another strategy in the case of ties, editors may invite authors to reply to a referee's criticisms and permit a compelling rebuttal to break the tie. If an editor does not feel confident to weigh the persuasiveness of a rebuttal, the editor may solicit a response from the referee who made the original criticism. In rare instances, an editor will convey communications back and forth between authors and a referee, in effect allowing them to debate a point. Even in these cases, however, editors do not allow referees to confer with each other, though the reviewer may see earlier comments submitted by other reviewers.
Typically referees are not selected from among the authors' close colleagues, students, or friends. Referees are supposed to inform the editor of any conflict of interests that might arise. Journals or individual editors often invite a manuscript's authors to name people whom they consider qualified to referee their work. Indeed, for a number of journals this is a requirement of submission. Authors are sometimes also invited to name natural candidates who should be disqualified, in which case they may be asked to provide justification (typically expressed in terms of conflict of interest). In some disciplines, scholars listed in an "acknowledgements" section are not allowed to serve as referees (hence the occasional practice of using this section to disqualify potentially negative reviewers[citation needed]).
Recruiting referees is a political art, because referees, and often editors, are usually not paid, and reviewing takes time away from the referee's main activities, such as his or her own research. To the would-be recruiter's advantage, most potential referees are authors themselves, or at least readers, who know that the publication system requires that experts donate their time. Referees also have the opportunity to prevent work that does not meet the standards of the field from being published, which is a position of some responsibility. Editors are at a special advantage in recruiting a scholar when they have overseen the publication of his or her work, or if the scholar is one who hopes to submit manuscripts to that editor's publication in the future. Granting agencies, similarly, tend to seek referees among their present or former grantees. Serving as a referee can even be a condition of a grant, or professional association membership.
Another difficulty that peer-review organizers face is that, with respect to some manuscripts or proposals, there may be few scholars who truly qualify as experts. Such a circumstance often frustrates the goals of reviewer anonymity and the avoidance of conflicts of interest. It also increases the chances that an organizer will not be able to recruit true experts – people who have themselves done work similar to that under review, and who can read between the lines. Low-prestige or local journals and granting agencies that award little money are especially handicapped with regard to recruiting experts.
Finally, anonymity adds to the difficulty in finding reviewers in another way. In scientific circles, credentials and reputation are important, and while being a referee for a prestigious journal is considered an honor, the anonymity restrictions make it impossible to publicly state that one was a referee for a particular article. However, credentials and reputation are principally established by publications, not by refereeing; and in some fields refereeing may not be anonymous.
The process of peer review does not end after a paper completes the peer review process. After being put to press, and after 'the ink is dry', the process of peer review continues as publications are read. Readers will often send letters to the editor of a journal, or correspond with the editor via an on-line journal club. In this way, all 'peers' may offer review and critique of published literature.


What are the different types of Journal article ?

There are several types of journal articles; the exact terminology and definitions vary by field and specific journal, but often include:
Letters (also called communications, and not to be confused with letters to the editor) are short descriptions of important current research findings that are usually fast-tracked for immediate publication because they are considered urgent.

Research notes are short descriptions of current research findings that are considered less urgent or important than Letters.

Articles are usually between five and twenty pages and are complete descriptions of current original research findings, but there are considerable variations between scientific fields and journals – 80-page articles are not rare in mathematics or theoretical computer science.

Supplemental articles contain a large volume of tabular data that is the result of current research and may be dozens or hundreds of pages with mostly numerical data. Some journals now only publish this data electronically on the internet.

Review articles do not cover original research but rather accumulate the results of many different articles on a particular topic into a coherent narrative about the state of the art in that field. Review articles provide information about the topic and also provide journal references to the original research. Reviews may be entirely narrative, or may provide quantitative summary estimates resulting from the application of meta-analytical methods.


What is IMRAD format?

The formats of journal articles vary, but many follow the general IMRAD scheme recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Such articles begin with an abstract, which is a one-to-four-paragraph summary of the paper. The introduction describes the background for the research including a discussion of similar research. The materials and methods or experimental section provides specific details of how the research was conducted. The results and discussion section describes the outcome and implications of the research, and the conclusion section places the research in context and describes avenues for further exploration.
In addition to the above, some scientific journals such as Science will include a news section where scientific developments (often involving political issues) are described. These articles are often written by science journalists and not by scientists. In addition, some journals will include an editorial section and a section for letters to the editor. While these are articles published within a journal, in general they are not regarded as scientific journal articles because they have not been peer-reviewed.

What is Authorship Criteria ?

Read an interestin article on "Authorship" by Dr. Bipasha Mukharjee. Click Here