In 2016, we received 695 manuscripts, which were distributed as follows: 305 original articles (44%); 167 scientific letters (24%); 9 editorials (1.3%); 12 special articles (2.2%); 12 articles endorsed by the AEP (2.4%); 31 letters to the editor (4.5%) and 157 images in paediatrics (22.6%). We ought to note that while the overall number of submitted manuscripts has not changed, there has been an increase in the proportion of original articles relative to last year (6%), as the number of submissions rose to 305 (44% of the total).

The overall acceptance rate for all types of articles was 33.9%, while the acceptance rate for original articles was 24%, decreasing in relation to previous years (Figs. 1 and 2).

Figure 1.

Annual changes in the total number of received and accepted manuscripts, years 2009–2016.

(0.1MB).

Figure 2.

Annual changes in the total number of received original article manuscripts and the percentage accepted.

(0.09MB).

These dates must be considered in the light of the changes in publishing guidelines introduced in June 2014, which included establishing a maximum word count for original articles, the replacement of special article submissions by special articles by invitation, substituting scientific letters for the former brief original articles, restricting the publication of single-case studies to truly exceptional reports, and transforming letters to the editor into a platform for debating editorial issues and previously published articles. Fig. 3 reflects the changes in the number and distribution of the manuscripts submitted to Anales under the new guidelines. The numbers of each type of article published in 2016 were: 64 originals, 41 scientific letters, 23 letters to the editor, and 16 special articles and articles endorsed by the AEP.

Figure 3.

Annual changes in the percentage of original articles, scientific letters and letters to the editor submitted to Anales.

(0.13MB).

The mean duration of the phases between receipt to the first editorial decision were: time from receipt of manuscript by Anales to assignment of an editor, 1.5 days (administrative interval); time from receipt by editor to submission to peer reviewers, 6 days (editor interval); and time of evaluation by the peer reviewers and decision by the editors, 14 days (evaluation interval). We can see that in 2016 the overall time elapsed in the evaluation of a manuscript has been of 21.5 days (Fig. 4). Adherence to these time frames in the past three years has been possible thanks to the enthusiasm, effort and quality of the work of the reviewers that have at all times supported the journal and the Editorial Board. It is worth noting that 90% of the reviewers submit their reports within the established time frame of 21 days.

Figure 4.

Mean manuscript processing times.

(0.18MB).

The time from the definitive acceptance of manuscripts to their publication “ahead of print” (that is, their indexing in the PubMed database, making their citation possible) was of 6.2 weeks, with a decrease of one week relative to 2015 and two weeks relative to 2014. In general, there has been a reduction in manuscript processing times, although the time elapsed between acceptance and inclusion in the journal, which continues to be considerable, still needs improvement.

The bilingual edition includes the original articles, scientific letters, editorials, special articles and AEP position papers. Introduced in June of 2014, we have succeeded in publishing the English and Spanish editions simultaneously since January 2016. In the second year of its bilingual publication, the “analesdepediatria.org” website has received 2236005 visits (Fig. 5), of which 28% corresponded to Spain, 19% to Mexico, 9% to Colombia, 8% to Argentina, 6% to Peru, 6% to Chile, 2% to the United States and 22% to other countries. To these figures, we have to add the visits made via ScienceDirect, which amounted to a total of 815295 (Fig. 6), although in this case the most frequent country of origin was the United States, with 603318 visits, amounting to 74% of the total (Fig. 7). This difference is significant from a quantitative standpoint, but even more so from a qualitative one in that it reflects the obvious visibility gained by Anales de Pediatría at the international level.

Figure 5.

Visibility of Anales de Pediatría. Number of visits to the website.

(0.07MB).

Figure 6.

Number of visits through ScienceDirect.

(0.06MB).

Figure 7.

Percentage of visits by country of origin (ScienceDirect).

(0.09MB).

This year, besides the Anales de Pediatría Award, the AEP decided to grant the Juan Rodríguez Soriano Award for the second time, thus consolidating it as another annual award for articles published in the journal. Both awards recognise the excellence of the selected works and will be presented at the Opening Ceremony of the AEP Congress.

The Anales de Pediatría Award is given to the original article considered to be the best among those published in the journal in the past year. The purpose of the award is to recognise the relevance of a scientific article in the field of child and adolescent health selected among the original articles published by Anales over the past year. It also seeks to advance the renown of the authors and to promote the diffusion of the article. It is selected by a jury that includes, among other members, the three reviewers who have collaborated with Anales most often during the year, and seven members of the AEP personally chosen by the Director of the Executive Board of Congresses of the AEP (Professor Antonio Jurado). In 2017, the award has been given to the original article: Calprotectina fecal como apoyo al diagnóstico en la alergia a las proteínas de leche de vaca no IgE mediada. Carlos Trillo Belizón, Eduardo Ortega Páez, Antonio F. Medina Claros, Isabel Rodríguez Sánchez, Ana Reina González, Rafael Vera Medialdea, José Manuel Ramón Salguero. An Pediatr 2016;84:318–234

In 2016, the Juan Rodríguez Soriano award, created to acknowledge the article cited most often and thus contributing most to the impact factor, has been given to the original article.5

The Editorial Board of Anales de Pediatría recognises and is grateful for the efforts made by the reviewers, as their ongoing and uninterested collaboration is key to the editorial process. Table 1 presents the reviewers that have contributed with their work in 2016. We have highlighted the name of those who contributed most to Anales this year.

Briefly, the Anales website is going to publish information regarding the articles read most often in the Spanish and English editions in the past three years. Furthermore, it will contain information on the most-read articles in the current issue.

Due to editorial reasons, starting from July 1st Anales de Pediatría will continue to be open to Members of the AEP that access the journal through the AEP website.

We would also like to use this opportunity to thank and congratulate the authors of the articles published in Anales, those that have received the Anales de Pediatría and Juan Rodríguez Soriano awards, as well as our steadfast for their excellent work.