Editorial Cite This: Org. Lett. 2018, 20, 1481−1482
pubs.acs.org/OrgLett
Update on Data Standards at Organic Letters
I
While there is much to celebrate in terms of increased data consistency, one area that continues to be an issue is edited spectra and/or spectral image quality. The NMR spectra for all accepted manuscripts are reviewed by a data analyst prior to publication to ensure all required data is included and the images presented are clear, legible, and properly labeled/ formatted. Our office will request the original FID data for any images that appear unusual. In our examination of manuscripts reviewed during the revision process, we have found that 2−3% have edited spectra while 4% have spectra of low resolution that require replacement images prior to publication. Most edited spectra cases involve a misguided attempt by the authors to conceal minor impurities such as water, solvent, or grease, which is not only unnecessary but undermines the validity of all the data. Scientific data should never be altered. In such cases, we work to educate the authors, giving them an opportunity to provide the original raw data and replace their edited spectra with unedited versions prior to publication. Our hope is that continuous education of the community will end this practice. Dealing with edited spectra in the editorial office is timeconsuming, and edited spectra have become more sophisticated and harder to detect. Additionally, according to the ACS Ethical Guidelines to the Publication of Chemical Research: “An author’s central obligation is to present an accurate and complete account of the research performed, absolutely avoiding deception, including the data collected or used···”. Therefore, in order to maintain the quality that Organic Letters is known for, submissions containing edited spectra or altered data will no longer be tolerated. Submissions found to have edited spectra after our investigation of the original FID files may be rejected without further review. Original data should be retained by authors for the long-term benefit of science, and to ensure proper data management plans. Authors submitting to Organic Letters are required to retain all original primary NMR data supporting a submission, and provide it if requested as per our guidelines. Retaining primary data to support a publication should be a priority for any researcher. To assist authors in being compliant with data retention and to improve the data published in Organic Letters, our guidelines were recently updated. The Organic Letters author guidelines were streamlined and simplified and provide improved instructions as well as additional hyperlinks for more detailed information. We encourage all authors and reviewers to review the guidelines prior to submission or reviewing a manuscript. In addition, to assist in preparing submissions, Organic Letters has developed two checklists which we hope will help authors to avoid common errors and data insufficiencies. The SI preparation checklist will help authors with consistency between manuscript/SI, proper labeling, and avoiding missing or incorrect data. Organic Letters has also developed a common
n our ongoing efforts to ensure the highest quality publication, Organic Letters has a continuing process for reviewing and modifying our data standards. We do this to ensure that data presented in our Letters are accurate and reproducible and to confirm that all experimental details are included, providing consistency between the manuscript and Supporting Information (SI). For each key compound described in the manuscript, we require a full procedure including the amount of product isolated, a physical description of the compound, and specific purification details. Over the past five years, feedback from our Associate Editors, Editorial Advisory Board, and Reviewers has suggested that a proof of principle scale-up reaction is beneficial for our readers to offer insight into the synthetic utility of the chemical transformations being described. Starting in January 2017, we requested that all new or improved one-step organic transformations include at least one example at the 1 mmol or greater scale. This requirement is not requested for biological, enzyme, or natural product syntheses. Since we started to apply this standard, we found that 29% of new submissions were missing this requirement. On average, the reaction scale presented in these manuscripts ranges between 0.1 and 0.4 mmol. However, we are pleased to report that once our authors are made aware of this new requirement, they have adjusted their submissions accordingly. Notably, there have been a few cases where authors were unable to scale up a reaction due to safety concerns. In these situations, we asked authors to include a cautionary note in the SI to alert readers to potential safety issues with the chemistry when scaling the reaction. Furthermore, Organic Letters implemented a new procedure for manuscripts containing organic, metal−organic, and inorganic crystallographic data in the CIF (Crystallographic Information File) format, thanks to a collaboration between the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre (CCDC). Since November 2017, authors are required to submit CIF files, structure factors, and checkCIF files to CCDC prior to manuscript submission and to provide the relevant CCDC deposition numbers during manuscript submission. The CCDC-submission saves time, prevents errors, and provides a single version of record that will be valuable to authors, reviewers, and readers. CIF submission instructions that outline the new procedure for authors are now included in the author guidelines. When we implemented a standard review of SI five years ago, we discovered that the required data for publication was often missing or contained incorrect data. We have worked diligently with authors to ensure submissions are complete, and as a result of this education process, our overall error rates have decreased. For example, in 2012, 20% of our accepted papers were initially missing an experimental procedure and/or spectra for a final compound and were corrected prior to publication. In 2017, the number dropped to 6%, which is impressive given our submissions increased by 9.5% during this time period! Our authors understand and appreciate the value that data standards adds to their Organic Letters submissions. © 2018 American Chemical Society
Received: March 5, 2018 Published: March 16, 2018 1481
DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.8b00733 Org. Lett. 2018, 20, 1481−1482
Organic Letters
Editorial
abbreviations and formatting checklist to assist authors with commonly used abbreviations, typical formatting conventions, sample tables and schemes. Submitting properly formatted manuscript and SI files that include the required data will avoid delays in evaluating your submission and save time during the revision process. Checklists are downloadable from the Organic Letters Web site and are included as a hyperlink on revision sheets. As Organic Letters approaches its 20th anniversary as a publication, we have always prided ourselves on working with authors to improve their submissions. Our procedures and processes continue to evolve to provide the highest quality publication for the benefit of our readers. Organic Letters is exactly where you want to be.
■
Angela M. Hunter, Data Analyst Amos B. Smith, III, Editor-in-Chief AUTHOR INFORMATION
ORCID
Angela M. Hunter: 0000-0002-3474-525X Amos B. Smith III: 0000-0002-1712-8567 Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the authors and not necessarily the views of the ACS.
1482
DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.8b00733 Org. Lett. 2018, 20, 1481−1482
