key: cord-283862-k6b4vyut
authors: Bates, Carol K.; Jackson, Jeff; Asch, Steven
title: From the Editor’s Desk: JGIM and COVID-19
date: 2020-04-22
journal: J Gen Intern Med
DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-05852-9
sha: 
doc_id: 283862
cord_uid: k6b4vyut

nan

All of this leads to the question of where JGIM can have the most impact. We have expedited some heartfelt pieces in healing arts and some perspectives which as always do not necessarily represent the opinions of the editors-in-chief-though we are not shy in sharing our opinions. We welcome pieces that are not dependent on the changing numbers and in particular manuscripts that set the stage for how we will continue to think about the dilemmas that we will face in the years to come. We have expedited this "From the Editor's Desk" even though it will not necessarily refer to articles in the same printed issue as has been our habit. So, ironically, if you are reading this in the print issue, we may have evolved our thinking about how best to review COVID-19 manuscripts in the meantime.

There is one last editorial question that we have revisited because of the pandemic. Our team has had some spirited conversations on decisions to publish material that has appeared in other places. We published one paper 1 that referred to another paper in an economics journal ultimately doing so because our readership would otherwise be unlikely to ever hear of this important manuscript. We have rarely published pieces that relate to AHRQ monographs, 2 because the monographs reached a limited audience. Similarly, we have considered papers on materials that are behind the VA firewall and inaccessible to readers who do not work in the VA. For COVID-19 papers, we have considered the question of whether we should publish material that has also been in the lay press. The value of publications in the lay press that exhort governmental action is obvious. The argument has been made that secondary (and most often later) publication in JGIM will give durability through PubMed indexing and the ability to reference these publications in the coming year.

Editorial guidance on the question of secondary publication comes from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). 3 The danger of duplicate/overlapping publication lies in the inadvertent double counting of data and the risk of overweighting of results. While not mentioned in ICMJE guidance, duplicate publication is also misleading in assessing promotion metrics in the overweighting of a body of work. ICMJE does have a proviso for public emergencies, stating that "…information with immediate implications for public health should be disseminated without concern that this will preclude subsequent consideration for publication in a journal." Therefore, while we recognize the risk that COVID-19-themed publications may put forward ideas that have already been disseminated in other settings, we are willing to take this risk and welcome submissions that may fall into that category.

Finally, a heartfelt thanks to readers working on the front lines. Many of you are leading the clinical, educational, and research mission and guiding our healthcare system's response to this crisis. We wish all the best of physical and mental health for all of our readers and their loved ones. Stay well.

Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The Tuskegee study of untreated syphilis: A case study in peripheral trauma with implications for health professionals

Primary care: the new frontier for reducing admissions

ICJME Recommendations, Overlapping Publications