Indian Journal of Urology Users online:425  
Home Current Issue Ahead of print Editorial Board Archives Symposia Guidelines Subscriptions Login 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size

  Table of Contents 
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 30  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 1

The first editorial

Department of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Date of Web Publication2-Jan-2014

Correspondence Address:
Rajeev Kumar
Department of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.124196

Rights and Permissions


How to cite this article:
Kumar R. The first editorial. Indian J Urol 2014;30:1

How to cite this URL:
Kumar R. The first editorial. Indian J Urol [serial online] 2014 [cited 2021 Dec 9];30:1. Available from:

This editorial will continue where the 'The last editorial' in the previous issue of the journal ended. [1] Dr. Nitin Kekre served as the Editor of the Indian Journal of Urology (IJU) for nine years, during which time he turned it into a journal that is read, respected, and quoted. These are the three most important attributes for a scientific publication. The Urological Society of India, which owns the journal, has entrusted me with the responsibility of maintaining its standards and breaking new grounds. I am grateful and humbled. My last seven years as an associate editor for the journal have been a learning experience and I aim to fully use that experience. As 'change is the only constant', we are abiding by the principle.

The Indian Journal of Urology receives over 400 manuscripts every year. We publish 80 to 100 of them on nearly 400 pages, with acceptance rates varying from less than 10% for case-reports to over 50% for invited reviews. Over the next few years, we aim to achieve a few specific objectives. We have to get ourselves indexed with the Science Citation Index and get an impact factor. Even as the value of impact factors is fiercely debated, it remains a barometer of scientific success, particularly among academic circles and recruitment agencies. We also aim to decrease the time between acceptance and publication. The first step toward this objective will be to hasten online e-publication so that the information is available in the public domain at the earliest. We hope this will encourage more submissions, as our free, open access policy will allow wider dissemination of the published work. One of the hurdles we face with this objective is poor author response post acceptance. It is common for manuscripts to be repeatedly sent back to authors for corrections and queries in the proof stage. This invariably delays publication. The third objective will be to increase reader participation. Case-discussions and forums have been extremely popular formats of scientific communication and we aim to explore these options for the IJU, probably through our online platform.

Another important objective that we will target is education regarding scientific study design, research methodology, conduct, analysis, and publication. The problem of scientific misconduct is widespread. At the IJU, we have always believed that the problem is primarily a lack of knowledge rather than an intent to cheat. [2] We have addressed this in the recent past at various forums and have initiated concrete remedial measures. [3] The IJU is conducting workshops for authors, reviewers, and editors, and will be carrying articles pertaining to this area regularly, in the future issues.

I would like to welcome the new editorial committee members who begin their tenures with me. Most of the existing members will continue in their positions, as their experience of the last few years is invaluable. I would also like to thank all our readers, authors, and reviewers for their support of the journal. We aim to become the pre-eminent Urological Journal of the region and this will not be possible without your contributions.

   References Top

1.Kekre NS. The last editorial. Indian J Urol 2013;29:371-2.  Back to cited text no. 1
2.Kumar R. The Science hoax: Poor journalology reflects poor training in peer review. BMJ 2013;347:f7465.  Back to cited text no. 2
3.Panda A, Kekre NS. Plagiarism: Is it time to rethink our approach? Indian J Urol 2013;29:87-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
  Medknow Journal  


Print this article  Email this article


    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Article in PDF (197 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded115    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal