Editorial pubs.acs.org/OPRD
In Praise of Short Papers for OPR&D “If your research does not generate papers, it might just as well not have been done,” is a phrase familiar to many in science. Producing publications in peer-reviewed journals is a major goal of research projects from the academic world. For industry, the disclosure of research results in the form of a patent application is more typical given the inherent close connection of research with economic interests. Industrial research is done by highly qualified and experienced scientists and is consequently performed and executed to very high standards. There are strong drivers for publishing this high-quality work from industry in the peer-reviewed literature. A publication in a peer-reviewed journal brings many benefits: it will be wellreceived on the basis of its scientific content and style thus raising the profile of the authors and their organization. In addition, the process of writing publications and receiving anonymous feedback from peers from other companies and academia raises the scientific bar effectively in any organization. The currency of success in the pharmaceutical and agrochemicals industries consists of outcomes of field or clinical testing and regulatory decisions. Realistically, this results in significant barriers to writing up work in the industrial environment. Projects can and will terminate based on results or decisions generated elsewhere in the business, as negative results obviate the need for the compound. When this happens, the development of a process often remains incomplete and is unlikely to form a polished “story” that would make it into many journals. Given the strong economic drivers in industrial research, starting work on the next project is more important than filling in gaps in the Supporting Information, or taking the time to perform additional experiments that support or disprove a hypothesis associated with a past project. Even when there is a full story to tell, other hurdles to publication exist: writing up results that were completed in the not-sorecent past, distributing the load amongst colleagues now working on different projects, and finding the time to write in addition to daily business obligations. And after all the effort, many potential publications may not make it through an internal review and release process due to concerns over the potential commercial sensitivity of the subject matter. A few years ago, Trevor Laird proposed an innovative solution to many of these hurdles where they apply to the readership of Organic Process Research & Development.1 He suggested the publication of more short technical notes relating to useful “tips and tricks” developed by industrial process chemists that have never before been shared outside of a particular organization. Effective work-up procedures or operations that minimize hazards are examples that would easily fall into this category, particularly where they have contributed to a successful kilo lab or pilot plant synthesis. By extension, there is also the possibility to share clever solutions to synthetic challenges in short full papers. The efficient synthesis of a building block is one such example which might appeal to those working in the fine chemicals and intermediate industries. The precise focus of the technical note or short paper would bring with it expectations around the provision of © XXXX American Chemical Society
a detailed experimental description of the transformation(s) in question. As a community there are many benefits to sharing information in this way. Such articles provide a vehicle for highlighting, to chemists and engineers who may not normally read OPR&D, great work that is going on within industrial process chemistry that would otherwise not make it into the public domain. In this manner, they would serve to enhance the external reputation of the individuals and groups that publish them, but also “give back” to the academic community. By packaging a useful piece of process development in a short article that stands alone, it is more likely to be found, digested, and used by the community, as opposed to being buried in a much larger body of work. The narrow focus of these articles means that their sharing is unlikely to raise objections from those that prioritize the commercial interests of the project or its product. Finally and needless to say, short papers should be easier to write than longer ones, and could also provide a convenient entry to the art of writing a peer-reviewed article for less-experienced colleagues. We therefore ask the Organic Process Research & Development readership to think about what you might share in this manner. It may have already appeared in an in-house journal, poster, or presentation, or it may be something that only exists as a concept in one’s own mind. Happy writing!
Alan Steven*
■
AstraZeneca Pharmaceutical Technology and Development, Macclesfield, U.K.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Alan Steven: 0000-0002-0134-0918
Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Laird, T. Org. Process Res. Dev. 2013, 17, 1367.
A
DOI: 10.1021/acs.oprd.7b00012 Org. Process Res. Dev. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
