The Journal uses a rigorous peer-review process, in which each submitted manuscript is externally reviewed by at least three people, selected for their expertise in the particular topic. In order to review over 1280 submissions, 307 individuals participated as reviewers for the Journal during the past year. The Editors would like to acknowledge all of the reviewers who have contributed to this process during that time. This is a voluntary effort performed by individuals during their personal time to advance the discipline of vascular surgery. The quality and impact of any scientific journal is primarily dependent on the quality of its peer-review process. We have been extraordinarily impressed by the quality and helpfulness of reviews performed for the Journal, which in many cases has substantially improved the quality of our published articles. The Editors are extremely grateful to all reviewers for their contribution.
Associate and Assistant Editors
For the past 2 years the Editors have benefited from the assistance of two Associate Editors, Dr. Louis Messina who acts as the editor for most basic research submissions, and Dr. Bruce Perler, who acts as a general editor, particularly when one of the senior editors is away. Their efforts have ensured both the timeliness and quality of our review process and contributed significantly to the quality of the manuscripts that have been selected for the Journal.
Assistant Editors help solicit, select and write content for various sections of the Journal that significantly broaden and enhance the Journal. We would like to thank Dr. James Jones for his efforts as Editor of the Ethics Section, Dr. Gregory Moneta for his efforts as Editor of the Abstracts Section and Dr. Kenneth Ouriel for his efforts as Editor of the Review Article Section.
Editorial board
Each review received by the Editors is rated according to its quality, accuracy, insight, and helpfulness to both the authors of the submission reviewed and the Editors. Editorial Board members are selected on the basis of an objective calculation of the quantity, quality and timeliness of their reviews. Our goal is to involve as many of our best reviewers as possible on the Editorial Board. Original manuscripts submitted to the Journal are reviewed by at least one member of the Editorial Board, who also submit invited commentaries and perform other duties for the Journal. During the past year, members of the Editorial Board each performed an average of 21 reviews and accounted for 34% of all the reviews that were done.
The Editors would particularly like to recognize the following Editorial Board members who will be retiring from the Board after many years of valuable service and countless hours of unselfish work in this process. We would also like to welcome new members of the Editorial Board, selected according to the process described above, who will be starting in January.
Continuing Board Members
George Andros, M.D.
Robert G. Atnip, M.D.
Martin R. Back, M.D.
Michael Belkin, M.D.
John J. Bergan, M.D.
Jan D. Blankensteijn, M.D., Ph.D.
Ruth L. Bush, M.D., M.P.H.
Jeffrey P. Carpenter, M.D.
Daniel G. Clair, M.D
Ronald L. Dalman, M.D.
Alan Dardik, M.D.
John F. Eidt, M.D.
Peter L. Faries, M.D.
Thomas L. Forbes, M.D.
Peter K. Henke, M.D.
Thomas S. Huber, M.D., Ph.D.
Lois A. Killewich, M.D.
Glenn M. LaMuraglia, M.D.
Michael P. Lilly, M.D.
Bengt Lindblad, M.D.
Thomas G. Lynch, M.D.
William C. Mackey, M.D.
Michel S. Makaroun, M.D.
James F. McKinsey, M.D.
Nicholas Morrissey, M.D.
Stuart I. Myers, M.D.
Peter Neglen, M.D., Ph.D.
Takao Ohki, M.D.
Richard J. Powell, M.D.
Caron B. Rockman, M.D.
David Rosenthal, M.D.
Joseph R. Schneider, M.D.
Retiring Board Members
Timothy A.M. Chuter, M.D.
Michael S. Conte, M.D.
Mark G. Davies, M.D.
William R. Hiatt, M.D.
Nicos Labropoulos, M.D., Ph.D.
Thomas F. Lindsay, M.D.
A. Ross Naylor, M.D.
Patrick J. O’Hara, M.D
Daniel B. Walsh, M.D.
New Board Members
Thomas Brothers, M.D.
Keith Calligaro, M.D.
James Froehlich, M.D.
William Jordan, M.D.
Jeffrey Kaufman, M.D.
Todd Rasmussen, M.D.
Hazim Safi, M.D.
Andre Van Rij, M.D.
Fred Weaver, M.D.
Distinguished reviewers
The Editors would also like to recognize a group of Distinguished Reviewers, who have performed at least seven reviews for the Journal during the past year and who have consistently performed high-quality and timely reviews. These individuals have collectively contributed 39% of the total reviews and represent ideal future candidates for the Editorial board. We are very grateful for their assistance and their outstanding contribution to the peer-review process.
Thomas E. Brothers
Lewis B. Schwartz
Hasan Haldun Dosluoglu
Eric David Endean
Fedor Lurie
Todd Erik Rasmussen
Keith D. Calligaro
Michael J. Rohrer
Gerald S. Treiman
Gilbert R. Upchurch
Ahmed Abou-Zamzam
Matthew J. Eagleton
Jeffrey L. Kaufman
William C. Pevec
Carlos H. Timaran
Fred Arthur Weaver
Marc Coggia
Linda Harris
Dean A. Healy
Mark D. Morasch
Janet T. Powell
Omaida C. Velazquez
Thomas W. Wakefield
Magruder C. Donaldson
Randolph L. Geary
Hans Olav Myhre
Hazim J. Safi
Lloyd M. Taylor
R. James Valentine
Ali F. AbuRahma
Joseph P. Archie
Jacob Buth
David L. Dawson
Ellen Dillavou
Karl A. Illig
Brajesh K. Lal
Gregory J. Landry
Robert A. McCready
Marc A. Passman
John D. Corson
Michael C. Dalsing
Luke S. Erdoes
Glenn R. Jacobowitz
James May
William J. Quinones-Baldrich
Timothy A Resch
Eric Wahlberg
Dennis F. Bandyk
Richard P. Cambria
Peter Gloviczki
William D. Jordan
Frank A. Lederle
Frank W. LoGerfo
Jon S. Matsumura
George H. Meier
Paul S. van Bemmelen
Andre Van Rij
Jean-Paul de Vries
Scott A. Berceli
Thomas M. Bergamini
G. Patrick Clagett
Anthony J. Comerota
Enrique Criado
Spencer Galt
Norman R. Hertzer
Jamal J Hoballah
Glenn C. Hunter
Ted R. Kohler
C. Keith Ozaki
Robert B. Patterson
Marc R.H.M. van Sambeek
Bruce J. Brener
Philip D. Coleridge-Smith
James R. Elmore
Mark A. Farber
Ralf R Kolvenbach
Timothy F. Kresowik
J. Gregory Modrall
Andre Nevelsteen
Tomas Pfeiffer
Frank B. Pomposelli
Timur Paul Sarac
Timothy M. Sullivan
Jan H.M. Tordoir
Eric Louis Gaston Verhoeven
G. Melville Williams
Mark Frederick Conrad
Wei Zhou
Reviewers
Finally, the Editors would like to recognize all the remaining individuals who performed at least one review for the Journal during the past year. In nearly all cases these reviews were excellent, and they collectively represented 27% of all reviews, emphasizing the importance of each individual reviewer to the peer-review process. We hope to expand the role of these reviewers in the future, and are very grateful for their efforts this year.
FULL TEXT