For any scientist, publishing can be a transformational moment in your career and a necessary service to the scientific community. Not only does publication place your work among the top researchers working today but, as Ana Marušić, former president of the Council of Science Editors, said, “Scientific articles are the most important measure of scientific achievement.”
ASPET’s five journals offer this opportunity. Kenneth Tew, PhD, the chair of ASPET’s Publications Committee, said:
Publication in an ASPET journal can be quite impactful. For many scientists, publishing in an ASPET journal has increased visibility of their work, led to collaborations, strengthened grant applications, and helped develop scientific presence/credibility. In some cases, ASPET papers can be keys for promotion, tenure, or transition to independent research leadership.
For early-career researchers, publishing is a necessary step for career advancement. Every month, the “On Their Way” section of The Pharmacologist features interviews given by Highlighted Trainee Authors. These early-career scientists, who have been recognized by the editorial boards of The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (JPET), Drug Metabolism and Disposition (DMD), and Molecular Pharmacology (MolPharm), often detail how publication has impacted their lives. Ana Catya Jiménez-Torres, whose work was published in JPET, called the journal “an amazing platform to make findings known to the world.” And yet, despite the importance of academic journals to the scientific community, many researchers are often unclear about how these publications work. What does open access entail, how does peer review work, what do editors hope to see in a submission?
This article, which includes interviews with the editors-in-chief of ASPET’s journals, as well as others associated with the journals in leadership roles, answers some of the most common questions researchers have, and provides insight into the teams working to uncover the science that will shape tomorrow’s innovations and discoveries.
Behind the Scenes
Who runs ASPET’s journals, and what are their specific responsibilities? We asked Dr. Tew to explain the roles, as well as those of the committee he chairs:
What are the roles of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board?
Kenneth Tew, PhD
Chair, Publications Committee
The Editor-in-Chief provides overall scientific and editorial leadership for a journal. This includes vision and scope; adherence to scientific rigor and integrity; editorial policies; final decisions on manuscripts; appointing and advising Associate Editors and editorial board members; and representing the journal with ASPET members, support staff, and the broad scientific community.
A journal’s Editorial Board is composed of discipline experts who support the peer-review process and maintain scientific standards. Board members typically handle manuscript reviews, make informed decisions about acceptance, advise on editorial policy/scope, identify emerging research areas, and serve as ambassadors for the journal by encouraging quality submissions.
What are the responsibilities of the Publications Committee?
The Publications Committee serves as a bridge between the journals and ASPET leadership, providing strategic oversight for all ASPET journals. The Committee Chair coordinates discussions on issues such as finances, policy, ethics, planning, editor appointments and evaluations, with an overall goal of ensuring consistency and quality across the journal portfolio.
What comprises the Publications Committee, and how are they related to the Editors-in-Chief?
The Publications Committee comprises seven At-Large appointed members, including one Chair and one Ethics Editor, and the five Editors-in-Chief of each of ASPET’s journals, as voting members. (Non-voting members include one Young Scientist Representative, ASPET’s Executive Officer, and ASPET’s Director of Publications.)
What are some of the issues that the Publications Committee deals with?
The Publications Committee deals with all issues pertinent to ASPET journals. These include:
- Editorial and publication ethics (e.g., conflicts of interest, misconduct, appeals), a growing problem in recent times.
- Journal policies on peer review, data transparency, and reproducibility
- Selection, evaluation, and reappointment of Editors-in-Chief
- Strategic planning, journal scope, growth, new initiatives
- Open access, publication models, and compliance with funder mandates
- Encouraging diversity across editorial leadership and process
The Publication Committee includes a Young Scientist Committee representative. What is their role, and the reason for their inclusion?
The Young Scientist Committee representative brings the perspective of early-career scientists to the Publications Committee. Their role is to highlight the needs, concerns and priorities of trainees and junior investigators. These might include career development, peer-review training, accessibility of publishing and open science. Inclusion of this representative helps ensure publication practices remain supportive of the next generation of scientists.
Why should a scientist join an editorial board, or peer review an article?
Serving on an editorial board or as a peer reviewer allows scientists to:
- Contribute to maintaining quality and integrity of the literature
- Stay current with research before publication
- Develop critical evaluation and editorial skills
- Build professional presence and expand scientific network
- Contribute to the community that supports their work
These roles are also viewed as important forms of professional service and leadership (almost a responsibility!), which can strengthen academic or professional profiles.
In addition to those positions, ASPET also has dedicated staff that work directly on the journals, including the Director of Publications, a Journal Operations Manager, and two Senior Journal Operations Coordinators. The journals are further supported by Elsevier in their production, operations, and marketing.
How can I join an Editorial Board, and what is the process for being considered?
Maria Pasho
Director, Publications
The Process of Publication
Once a paper has been submitted to an ASPET journal (ensuring the author has followed the specific submission guidelines for JPET, DMD, MolPharm, Pharmacological Reviews (PharmRev), or ASPET Discovery), it is reviewed to determine its suitability for that particular journal. If the paper is deemed appropriate by that initial review, it is then sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess its scientific quality. These reviewers each write a detailed report, determining the paper’s strengths and weaknesses, as well as their recommendations for publication. All of the ASPET journals follow a “single anonymized review” process, in which the names of the reviewers are hidden from the author. This is the traditional, and most common, method of reviewing.
The author is then informed of this feedback, as well as any requested revisions to their paper. If they agree to the revisions, the paper is eventually revised to the point where it is acceptable for publication, or the editor determines that the author(s) will not be able to make the necessary changes. At that point, a final decision on acceptance or rejection is made.
We asked the editors-in-chief of ASPET’s journals for their thoughts on what makes for a publishable paper, as well as what doesn’t:
Xinxin Ding, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Drug Metabolism and Disposition
We often turn down papers that report routine analysis of metabolism and disposition properties of drug candidates, as they provide little in the way of novel and fundamental insights that would benefit others in the field. Other than a well-written paper that meets our quality standards and scientific rigor, we hope to see truly novel discoveries, impactful data, stimulating discussions, and exciting perspectives.
Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld, PhD, FASPET
Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
John Tesmer, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Molecular Pharmacology
Mostly what I hope for is a story well told, data panels that are clear and have the appropriate statistical analysis, and that move the field forward in some way. Doesn’t have to be a tectonic shift. Ideally just solid, well-crafted research within the scope of the journal.
An automatic disqualifier is if it is clear the authors have not bothered to consult the Guide to Authors or looked at our papers in print to see the styles and standards that we require. Another is if the authors use chemical probes, such as natural products, at concentrations that are far beyond physiologically relevance or where they only make a correlative link between dosing and the effects they see in cells or animals. We also see a lot of papers where the authors do not experimentally validate key computational models. These are also rejected.
Lynette Daws, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Pharmacological Reviews
We expect articles submitted to Pharmacological Reviews to be comprehensive and authoritative. Our articles are predominantly invited submissions from thought leaders in the field. These papers are typically 30 or more pages in print with over 200 hundred references. They are more than a summary of literature reports, but a critical integration of findings concluding with a forward-thinking perspective on the topic. Articles of this nature focus on areas where there is sufficient literature to warrant reviews of this magnitude.
Automatic disqualifiers include submissions that are considerably shorter than this, focus on niche areas of pharmacology or are not pharmacologically based. The corresponding author’s stature in the field is also a consideration for unsolicited reviews.
Upon Acceptance
There is no charge to publish your research with The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Molecular Pharmacology, Drug Metabolism and Disposition, or Pharmacological Reviews. All of those journals follow a hybrid model, in which the journal is primarily funded through subscriptions (both from individual subscribers and institutions). That said, if you choose to publish your work with those journals in accordance to the Open Access model, you will need to pay Article Processing Charges (APCs).
In a subscription-based journal, the published articles are typically only accessible to subscribers of that journal. However, starting in the 1990s, open access was developed (as stated by the Budapest Open Access Initiative), to “make research free and available to anyone with internet access and promote advances in the sciences, medicine, and health.” With open access, scholars can publish their work with a journal, pay an APC, and have their work accessible to anyone. There are various types of open access, but the four hybrid ASPET journals are all “gold open access,” which means that open access articles are freely available with permitted reuse.
Launched in 2025 as part of ASPET’s partnership with Elsevier, ASPET Discovery is a fully open access journal. Although an APC is required to publish with this journal, several promotional discounts are available:
- 100% off the Open Access charge for manuscripts submitted through December 31, 2026
- 50% off the Open Access charge for manuscripts submitted between January 1 and December 31, 2027
- ASPET members are eligible for a discount of 25% off the APC for any of our journals
John D. Schuetz, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, ASPET Discovery
ASPET Discovery publishes a range of article types, including original research articles, minireviews, and viewpoints that address all areas of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics. These areas include, but are not limited to, topics on interactions of chemicals with biological systems; drug absorption, distribution, metabolism and disposition; drug delivery; mechanisms of drug actions; pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics; toxicology and adverse drug responses; behavioral pharmacology and drugs of abuse; and preclinical, translational, and clinical pharmacology. The journal covers all types of therapeutic indications, such as cardiovascular, infectious, neurological, and cancerous; all forms of therapeutics, such as small molecules, biologics, and cells; and all research approaches, such as molecular, cellular, and systems pharmacology.
After peer review, edits, production, and the publishing agreement is signed, the paper is published. Mike Jarvis, PhD, Ethics Editor for ASPET’s journals, recalled his first publication with JPET in 1989:
It remains one of my most highly cited articles as it was instrumental in defining adenosine receptor pharmacology. Professionally, this paper was key to my gaining membership into ASPET (a much more complicated process back then!) and proved my credibility as a drug-hunter to my pharma company senior management. It also helped me gain my first promotion.
We asked the editors-in-chief for their thoughts on how the publication of a certain paper in an ASPET journal (either their own paper, or someone else’s) impacted their career:
Xinxin Ding, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Drug Metabolism and Disposition
My first paper was published in Molecular Pharmacology in 1986. Through that paper, my PhD mentor (the late Dr. Minor J. Coon) taught me how to write a scientific paper. I still remember how the pages were covered in red ink after his edits.
The majority of my work is published in ASPET journals. Some of the early papers set the stage for my long-term interest in P450 expression and function in extrahepatic tissues, such as: “Immunochemical characterization of multiple forms of cytochrome P-450 in rabbit nasal microsomes and evidence for tissue-specific expression of P-450s NMa and NMb,” “Induction of cytochrome P-450 isozyme 3a (P-450IIE1) in rabbit olfactory mucosa by ethanol and acetone”, “In vivo mechanisms of tissue-selective drug toxicity: effects of liver-specific knockout of the NADPH-cytochrome P450 reductase gene on acetaminophen toxicity in kidney, lung and nasal mucosa,” and “Purification and characterization of heterologously expressed mouse CYP2A5 and CYP2G1: role in metabolic activation of acetaminophen and 2, 6-dichlorobenzonitrile in mouse olfactory mucosal microsomes.”
Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld, PhD, FASPET
Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Rather than a specific publication influencing my career, it was the amazing fellow scientists I have met while being a member of the ASPET scientific and publication committees that has significantly impacted my career.
John Tesmer, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Molecular Pharmacology
I have contributed to 14 papers in the journal. Thus, one way Molecular Pharmacology has positively impacted my career is that it has always given me reliably speedy, fair, and useful feedback for my drug discovery work, which in turn support my funding. And these papers get cited. For instance, one of my papers has garnered over 109 citations since 2011. I also appreciate the journal’s Mini-Review format, which gives a “short and sweet” synopsis of growing areas of interest that are easy to digest by the broader scientific community. In this manner, our 2010 minireview on heterotrimeric G protein regulated Rho guanine nucleotide exchange factors (our most highly cited MolPharm paper at 131) helped put us on the map as experts in that arena.
Lynette Daws, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Pharmacological Reviews
It was the fifth paper I published in my scientific career, and the second as a postdoctoral fellow. The publication, in JPET, was the culmination of a comprehensive study showing, in vivo, that serotonin could be taken up by the norepinephrine transporter in dentate gyrus of hippocampus. The review process was smooth and efficient. This research article turned out to be the springboard to my entire academic career dedicated to understanding promiscuity among transporters for monoamines and how they can contribute to ineffectiveness of therapeutics targeting only one or two monoamine transporters (e.g., selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, dual serotonin and norepinephrine transporter inhibitors) and how transporters such as the organic cation transporter 3 might be leveraged as a novel target to increase the therapeutic efficacy of these drugs.
A Paper’s Impact
Citations are often considered a natural expression of an article’s importance—indicative of its relevance and influence, and a measurement of a paper’s impact within the field. And, of course, citations reflect well on the journal that published the research.
Originally established to help librarians determine which journals were the best subscription options, the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a metric used to evaluate the scientific relevance of its recently published papers. The JIF is calculated by a relatively simple formula that determines the ratio between the number of citations received for publications from the past two years, and the total number of “citable items.”
Calculation of 2024 JIF of a journal:
- A = the number of times articles published in 2023 and 2022 were cited by indexed journals during 2024.
- B = the total number of “citable items” published in 2023 and 2022.
- A/B = 2025 impact factor
You might think this is an imperfect way to judge the quality of a journal’s content, and you’re certainly not alone. Even one of the creators of the Journal Impact Factor, Eugene Garfield, PhD, agreed with the statement that it’s “not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles.” Other quantitative measurements have been introduced and, in 2012, the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) was developed, with the primary recommendation of not using “journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist’s contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions.” This declaration offers alternatives to counter the weight of a journal’s impact factor, and has signatories from organizations in over 171 countries.
ASPET’s journals have had the fortune, and stewardship, to occupy a prestigious place in pharmacology, and we asked the editors-in-chief to discuss the significance of their journals:
Xinxin Ding, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Drug Metabolism and Disposition
DMD has been the main platform for publication of most important works in the drug metabolism and disposition field. A recent journal report showed top ten cited DMD articles in 2023–2025, and those articles have been cited hundreds to over a thousand times. They have had a huge impact on subsequent research on important therapeutics, such as resveratrol, curcumin, cannabinoids, and clopidogrel; provided important guidance on how to study such important topics as drug-drug interactions and human drug clearance prediction in drug development; and served as resources for fundamental knowledge on drug metabolism enzymes, transporters, and their regulatory molecules.
DMD was launched in response to the “renaissance” in drug metabolism research in the early 1970s, which provided a strong demand for a specialized journal focused on the subject. The recent 2023–2024 collection of articles commemorating the 50th anniversary of the journal is widely read, forecasting continued interest of our readers and success of the journal.
Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld, PhD, FASPET
Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
When I became the Editor in Chief it was a “significant moment” for JPET because I was only the 2nd female scientist to serve in this role since 1909. With 40 years of research experience in academia and industry, my overarching goal as the Editor in Chief of JPET has been to return JPET to its rightful position as one of the top pharmacology journals. Over the past four years, I have aimed to improve the global outreach of the journal by focusing recent efforts on publishing a series of new Special Collections which feature original basic, translational, and clinical research articles, mini-reviews, and an editorial highlighting the impact of that Special Collection. We have also introduced a new article type called Viewpoint which was developed to broaden the scientific content of JPET by inviting an author to present a new or unique perspective on a manuscript recently accepted for publication in JPET. I have also launched a new research article section, and JPET is now accepting manuscript submissions in Clinical Pharmacology. This new article descriptor has been established to underscore the critical role that clinical pharmacology plays in advancing human health and supporting both the development of new drugs and post-approval research. Effective, fair, and timely reviews of submitted manuscripts are critical for the vibrancy of JPET. As a way of thanking referees for their efforts, I was pleased to work with the ASPET journal staff to introduce awards for our best reviewers.
John Tesmer, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Molecular Pharmacology
The first publication I think of is Sriram & Insel’s solid analysis on GPCRs as drug targets (2018). This paper is highly cited because it makes the case for anyone who needs to highlight the therapeutic potential of discovering new drugs targeting these receptors. In more recent years, I think of Dogra & Conn’s review of metabotropic receptors as targets for treatment of schizophrenia (2022). Both of these papers highlight an important function of the journal, which is to provide high quality, easy to read summaries of key areas of pharmacological research composed by leading experts in these areas.
Lynette Daws, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Pharmacological Reviews
“Nitric Oxide: Physiology, Pathophysiology and Pharmacology” by Moncada, Palmer and Higgs, published in 1991, has been an absolute blockbuster for Pharmacological Reviews, garnering over 21,500 citations. Other notable reviews include “The Effects of Plant Flavonoids on Mammalian Cells: Implications for Heart Disease and Cancer” by Middleton Jr., Kandaswami and Theoharides, published in 2000, which has been cited over 7,600 times, and “The Glutamate Receptor Ion Channels” by Dingledine, Borges, Bowie and Traynelis, published in 1999, which has been cited over 5,650 times. Notably, an update of this review published in 2010, “Glutamate Receptor Ion Channels: Structure, Regulation and Function” by Traynelis, et al., and Dingledine has been cited over 4,600 times. These are just a handful of Pharmacological Reviews’ many highly cited articles, which contribute to the long-standing outstanding JIF as well as a citation half-life of greater than 10 years.
In addition, the International Union of Pharmacology (IUPHAR) pipeline of reviews that are published in Pharmacological Reviews are some of the most comprehensive and authoritative in the field. Many of these reviews are well in excess of 40–50 pages in press and serve as vital reference resources for academicians the world over. One example is the “International Union of Pharmacology Classification of Receptors for 5-Hydroxytryptamine (Serotonin)” by Hoyer and colleagues in 1994. This review was recently updated in 2021, “International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. CX. Classification of Receptors for 5-Hydroxytryptamine; Pharmacology and Function” by Barnes et al., and Hoyer totaling 210 pages in press! IUPHAR reviews are also among the journal’s most highly cited papers.
Ethics
Publishing isn’t without its controversies. Editors occasionally have to issue a retraction, expression of concern, or correction for a published work for various reasons, some of which are inappropriate image manipulation, plagiarism, and the misuse of artificial intelligence, to name just a few. Maria Pasho, ASPET’s Director of Publications, notes, “There is also the challenge of paper mill submissions, which are fake manuscripts submitted by “authors” from fraudulent, for-profit organizations. Our editors are getting very good at spotting these poor-quality, fabricated papers, often within minutes of opening them, but there are inevitably some that still get further through the peer-review pipeline, sometimes being caught by reviewers. ASPET’s publishing partner, Elsevier, collaborates with other publishers to share best practices to achieve the goal of finding technological solutions for this problem, which affects all journals, and can be exhausting for the editors who already have a heavy workload.”
To that end, Mike Jarvis, PhD, was appointed as ASPET’s first Ethics Editor (you can read more about this appointment in the July 2025 issue of The Pharmacologist). We asked Dr. Jarvis about his role and responsibilities:
What are the roles of the Ethics Editor and the Ethics Subcommittee?
Mike Jarvis, PhD
Ethics Editor and Chair, Ethics Subcommittee
The essential role of the Ethics Subcommittee, and myself as Chair, is to support the ASPET publications team and the ASPET journal editors with real or perceived ethical issues for all ASPET’s journals. Examples of such issues include corrections to published or accepted articles, peer-review conflicts of interest, authorship accountability and disputes, scientific misconduct including image integrity issues, inappropriate generative AI use, fraudulent submissions, and interactions with institutional research integrity offices. The Subcommittee confidentially evaluates the scientific issues involved in all publication ethics cases and makes resolution recommendations to the ASPET Journal Editors and publications staff.
You’ve touched before on the role of journal editors and editorial boards to ensure that scientific quality is maintained in academic publication, particularly with the ASPET journals. Can you discuss some of the safeguards that are in place?
Critical and constructive peer-review is the foundational element in building credibility and trust for any scientific journal. ASPET has a very long history of scientific leadership in this area. As the publishing landscape continues to evolve, ASPET and its publishing partner, Elsevier, have state-of-the-art infrastructure to assist peer-reviewers and editors. These tools include robust publication policies, automated plagiarism and image-analysis assessments, and prominent expert editorial boards. The Ethics Subcommittee provides an additional mechanism to support consistent decision making and ASPET’s institutional memory in the handling of often complex and difficult ethical issues.
What’s been the most common ethical issue that’s occurred, and what do you think will be the challenges for maintaining ASPET’s high standards in the future?
Ethical issues for ASPET publications are rare. When they do arise, ASPET independently evaluates all aspects of these issues on a case-by-case basis, and most are readily resolvable. Issues surrounding the generation and analysis of photomicrographs and western blots are common in many ethical cases. That said, most of these issues are resolved by the authors producing the original data, making appropriate corrections, and enhancing the level of detail provided in descriptions of the experimental methods and figure legends.
What happens when an article needs to be revised, post-publication, or has an inaccuracy?
Whenever a potential ethics issue with a published article is identified, the ASPET Ethics Subcommittee conducts a confidential and independent assessment of the issue. This process typically involves direct communication with the authors and journal editor to determine root causes and generation of a resolution recommendation. Specific recommendations may include publication of a corrigendum (correction) to fix a technical error, publication of an Expression of Concern regarding a specific aspect of the article, or a full retraction of the publication. Since all ethics issues are handled on a case-by-case basis, the specific recommendation is tailored to alert the journal readership to the issues involved and to communicate an editorial decision that addresses the scientific confidence in the publication considering the verified ethical issue. These editorial actions are rare but necessary to uphold the scientific reliability of ASPET Journal publications.
Peering Into Publishing’s Future
Recent cuts to scientific funding and concerns about irresponsible use of AI have left many in academic publishing uneasy. We asked the editors-in-chief for their thoughts on the future of academic journals.
Much has been made of China’s rise in academic publishing, particularly with the regression of the United States in 2025, and the sense that this may be a long-term dynamic. Do you agree with that sentiment?
Xinxin Ding, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Drug Metabolism and Disposition
Yes, I expect to see continued increase in the number of manuscripts submitted (and accepted) from China in 2026.
Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld, PhD, FASPET
Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
I concur that Chinese scientists are attempting to publish their research in ASPET journals, which I see as a good thing. However, I don’t agree as strongly that there has been a regression in science and scientific publishing in the US in 2025. We are definitely experiencing a bump in the road, but I am optimistic that US researchers will come out stronger and more determined to produce the highest quality research over the upcoming years.
John Tesmer, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Molecular Pharmacology
For at least for the next three years. A more science-positive administration would go a long way to reverse the regression and give basic research into therapeutics a badly needed boost. One, however, should take China’s “rise” with a grain of salt in that although it is true more manuscripts are coming in from Asia, the statistics indicate that the overall quality of most of these papers is not rising as quickly with the tide.
Lynette Daws, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Pharmacological Reviews
Yes, I agree with this overall sentiment. Federal funding support for science, technology and discovery has been waning for years. Not surprisingly, the US academic publication output is waning in parallel. This slippery slope, if not reversed soon, could lead to irreparable damage to our science enterprise. In turn, the US will no longer be the country developing cures and new treatments for devastating diseases. We will become reliant on countries like China for these breakthroughs.
Are there potential trends or topics you expect to see in 2026 submissions?
Xinxin Ding, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Drug Metabolism and Disposition
The field has been abuzz with activities related to new approach methodologies in recent years, such as organoids. I expect to see more submissions on this topic in 2026. There may also be more papers on AI applications in predictive DMPK models and ADME of biological drugs.
Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld, PhD, FASPET
Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
In 2026 JPET is planning to publish a series of Special Collections that focus on advancing pharmacotherapy for age-related diseases, novel targeted therapies for advances prostate cancer, therapies targeting the immune system, and new therapeutic approaches to treat PTSD and related sequelae.
John Tesmer, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Molecular Pharmacology
We expect to continue to see an upwards trend in submissions and citations, probably largely due to greater exposure provided by Elsevier, and an increase in the number of papers from international labs. I think that members of ASPET are also responding to our efforts to highlight the value of the service we do for the society in our journals, and to remind them that their support of society journals by submitting solid work in return supports the health of ASPET and its programming.
Thematically, I suspect we will see an increase in the number of papers looking at gated ion channels and in the realm of cancer pharmacology.
Lynette Daws, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Pharmacological Reviews
Quite possibly there will be an increase in the number of unsolicited reviews addressing different aspects of AI. However, since the majority of our reviews are invited, we anticipate continuing to publish a good cross-section of reviews, which span the full gamut of pharmacology topics.
Publishing in scientific journals has a storied history, but it’s a system that can often seem confusing. We hope this article has answered any questions you may have. If you’re interested in publishing your research with the ASPET journals, but you’re uncertain whether your work is a good fit, or have any questions about the process which were not answered here, you’re welcome to submit a pre-submission inquiry to the editorial staff ahead of time (please refer to that journal’s specific Guide to Authors for contact information).
We look forward to sharing your research with the scientific community.
