Factors impacting time to acceptance and publication for peer-reviewed publications

Abstract

Objective: Timely publication of data is important for the medical community and provides a valuable contribution to data disclosure. The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate times to acceptance and publication for peer-reviewed manuscripts, reviews, and letters to the editor.

Research design and methods: Key publication metrics for published manuscripts, reviews, and letters to the editor were identified by eight Amgen publications professionals. Data for publications submitted between 1 January 2013 and 1 November 2015 were extracted from a proprietary internal publication-tracking database. Variables included department initiating the study, publication type, number of submissions per publication, and the total number of weeks from first submission to acceptance, online publication, and final publication.

Results: A total of 337 publications were identified, of which 300 (89%) were manuscripts. Time from submission to acceptance and publication was generally similar between clinical and real-world evidence (e.g. observational and health economics studies) publications. Median (range) time from first submission to acceptance was 23.4 (0.2–226.2) weeks. Median (range) time from first submission to online (early-release) publication was 29.7 (2.4–162.6) weeks. Median (range) time from first submission to final (print) publication was 36.2 (2.8–230.8) weeks. Time from first submission to acceptance, online publication, and final publication increased accordingly with number of submissions required for acceptance, with similar times noted between each subsequent submission.

Conclusions: Analysis of a single-company publication database showed that the median time for manuscripts to be fully published after initial submission was 36.2 weeks, and time to publication increased accordingly with the number of submissions. Causes for multiple submissions and time from clinical trial completion to first submission were not assessed; these were limitations of the study. Nonetheless, publication planners should consider these results when evaluating timelines and identifying potential journals early in the publication planning process.

Keywords:

• Publication bias
• publication metrics
• publication planning
• publication timing
• publications
• publishing

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was funded by Amgen Inc.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

D.T., J.C., M.R., J.G., V.G., L.S., J.N., and J.O. have disclosed that they are employees of and stockholders in Amgen Inc.

CMRO peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge Miranda Tradewell PhD and James Balwit MS CMPP (Complete Healthcare Communications LLC), whose work was funded by Amgen Inc., for medical writing support.

Previous presentation: These data were presented in part at the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals, National Harbor, MD, USA, 11–13 April 2016.