Can you tell us a little bit about your paper that was published in CVIR Endovascular?

Clements: The manuscript titled “SPLEnic salvage and complications after splenic artery EmbolizatioN for blunt abdomINal trauma: the SPLEEN-IN study” was a 10-year retrospective study assessing splenic salvage after splenic artery embolisation for blunt trauma from our level 1 trauma centre in Melbourne, Australia. Even though the median injury was AAST grade IV, of the 232 patients in the study only 7 patients required splenectomy (3%). The results show that embolisation, known to be a low-cost and low-morbidity procedure, is also a very effective treatment for acute blunt trauma in stable patients.

Communication of new technologies and short communications have always been the cornerstone of the growth of interventional radiology. Do you think there are currently enough easily accessible interventional radiology publication possibilities for case reports, short communications, technical notes etc.?

Clements: IR is and has always been a rapidly evolving area of medicine and this is one of the many reasons I was attracted to the specialty. Communicating new ways to treat diseases with either lower cost or lower morbidity is important. Many of the more established journals don’t necessarily offer the same volume of publication opportunities for technical notes or smaller case reports/series. Small commentaries are also important tools to discuss rapidly changing issues in IR.

Open access journals such as CVIR Endovascular offers a great platform to communicate these types of papers where physical publication space is less of an issue than for traditional subscription print journals. At the moment, I don’t think there are enough IR-specific journals that offer this. However, I see that this is a rapidly evolving area which has grown enormously over the last 5 years and may continue to grow in the next 5.

Open access is the future in scientific publishing. What is your experience with open access? Was your paper in CVIR Endovascular your first open access publication? How did you find the editorial handling experience?

Clements: Open access is a great way to provide information for all scientists and clinicians to access, without restrictions. This is especially important for low and middle-income countries, or for clinicians outside of metropolitan teaching hospitals who may not have a university affiliation or a library which has subscribed to a range of common journals.

This was my second publication in CVIR Endovascular and on both occasions I had an excellent experience with the journal. The manuscript was sent for peer review without delay, and the responses including the Editor’s comments were returned well ahead of timeframes from many other journals I have published in. In addition, revisions were addressed rapidly by the journal and progressed to production quickly.

The only difficulty with this model comes from my research group’s physical location in Australia where open access has yet to take off as a universally accepted publication standard. As such, funding for open access does currently limit my ability to use this model of publication more frequently. I hope that this will change in my country as open access continues to grow.

Impact factor is still an important scientific parameter in many institutions, although other parameters like citation index are becoming more important. How is this in your institution and what is your opinion about this?

Clements: My academic affiliation is with Monash University and cumulative impact factor remains an important factor for academic recognition. At this stage, newer metrics are not openly used by the university.

However, my personal opinion is that newer metrics such as article access counts and Altmetric scores can give a different view on how manuscripts are perceived, particularly in the early stages after their release. Higher scores for these metrics often reflect an interesting or highly relevant topic which may not receive citations for many months or years. It will be interesting to see whether higher scores will eventually correlate with a high number of citations.

Young scientists find it more and more difficult to get their first papers published. Do you think that CVIR Endovascular can play a role in alleviating the situation?

Clements: I believe that there are a number of ways that young clinician-researches can strengthen their academic career. Certainly, there is much that needs to be done at a local level with mentoring, normalising academia, journals clubs, and practicing good evidence-based medicine. At a societal level there are also many resources that CIRSE can and do provide to its junior IRs to ensure that they have access to workshops and question-and-answer sessions.

However, CIVR endovascular has also shown that research can be published without having limitations on physical print journal space, and that good quality research can always be accepted. In addition, initiatives such as the reviewer forum are a great way for journals to integrate promising researchers into the editorial process at an early stage.

I also strongly believe that being a reviewer makes you a better writer, and that having a constructive and analytical mindset will lead to a more thorough and non-biased style for authors. As such, I applaud CVIR Endovascular for encouraging all IRs regardless of their seniority to review for the journal, and being open to discuss this at many CIRSE events.

Would you consider submitting your scientific work to CVIR Endovascular again and if so, why?

Clements: I absolutely would consider publishing in CVIR Endovascular again and there are a couple of reasons for this. First, the open peer review policy means that reviews are timely and constructive. By having the reviewer name printed I believe that it is less likely that a biased or negative review will occur, which is better for authors. Secondly, the process with the journal and publisher was extremely quick. At many other journals I have waited many months before hearing back from a first submission and this is often repeated in the revisions. It is in my experience not uncommon for an article to be put into press 12 months after the first submission. With CVIR Endovascular, the reviews were quick and the revisions were accepted promptly. Not only this, but the article was put into publication rapidly and the results were shared online very quickly. As an author, a swift process is refreshing and is a strong reason to return and submit again. Finally, editorial responses were timely and staff at the journal were very helpful with my queries.

Can you tell us a little bit about your paper that was published in CVIR Endovascular?

Rostampour: We surveyed UK Interventional Radiologists to establish how the Covid-19 pandemic had affected their IR services and how IR services adapted to the challenges faced by the medical world. The survey highlighted how useful day care facilities were in maintaining the service in the crisis and that although changes had to be made, over 80% of respondants could maintain vital 24/7 on call services. Many centres also assisted clinicians on ICU by providing central line services.

Communication of new technologies and short communications have always been the cornerstone of the growth of interventional radiology. Do you think there are currently enough easily accessible interventional radiology publication possibilities for case reports, short communications, technical notes etc.?

Rostampour: I think that it is really important to have a wide variety of publications now the field of interventional radiology.  As a procedure based practical speciality it is important to be able to share expertise about technical aspects of performing procedures and new techniques. Equally, it is essential to perform and publish high quality scientific research to take the speciality forward. I think it is important that there are a variety of journals which will accept publications of all types - however it is essential that a high standard is maintained.  

Open access is the future in scientific publishing. What is your experience with open access? Was your paper in CVIR Endovascular your first open access publication? How did you find the editorial handling experience?

Rostampour: This was my first open access publication; the entire process was smooth and efficient.  I had a very good experience with the CVIR Endovascular Editorial Team.

Impact factor is still an important scientific parameter in many institutions, although other parameters, like citation index, are becoming more important. How is this in your institution and what is your opinion about this?

Rostampour: Impact factor is a well-established measure of the importance of scientific findings and signposting clinicians and scientists to the most relevant research. However, as a single measure it has its limitations and should not be the only thing that drives publication of research.  The overall aim should be to report varied and high-quality data and journals should publish both positive and negative findings of importance.

Young scientists find it more and more difficult to get their first papers published. Do you think that CVIR Endovascular can play a role in alleviating the situation?

Rostampour: Producing high quality scientific research takes time and many Interventional Radiologists in the UK currently do not to an MD/PhD.  Most trainees are carrying out research alongside clinical practice.  CVIR Endovascular accepts a wide range of papers and as such is a fantastic place to trainees to submit case reports, communications and technical tips. 

Would you consider submitting your scientific work to CVIR Endovascular again and if so, why?

Rostampour: I would definitely submit work to this journal again and look forward to doing so.  We had a good response to our paper last year and a good experience working with the editorial team.

Can you tell us a little bit about your paper that was published in CVIR Endovascular?

Sommer: With great pleasure. Our team was able to publish a paper in the field of Lipiodol based lymphangiography in CVIR Endovascular. The focus of the work is on the great importance of CT imaging during and after lymphangiography: IDENTIFICATION and DEFINITION of lymphatic pathology, and furthermore PLANNING of specific second-line lymphatic interventions (e.g., thoracic duct sclerotherapy) in case Lipiodol based lymphangiography alone remains clinically ineffective. Detailed figures, illustrations, and a review of the literature are provided in the paper.

Communication of new technologies and short communications have always been the cornerstone of the growth of Interventional radiology. Do you think there are currently enough easily accessible Interventional radiology publication possibilities for case reports, short communications, technical notes etc.?

Sommer: New formats for communicating medical and strategic content are very welcome. I am thinking, for example, of structured video lessons that help to disseminate topics in interventional radiology in a standardized and clear manner. A kind of practical version of the "CIRSE Standards of Practice" may be appreciated by different users. This could also include discussion of the pros and cons of various medical devices, with the goal of product optimization for improved patient care. For medical journals in particular, I see a great opportunity in interactive .pdf files that allow interested parties to delve into complex issues in an entertaining but highly professional way. The strategy has already been successfully established in the HeiCuMed (Heidelberg Curriculum Medicinale) study program, which provides students with excellent qualifications for later employment in medical health care as well as in medical research and teaching.

Open access is the future in scientific publishing. What is your experience with open access? Was your paper in CVIR Endovascular your first open access publication? How did you find the editorial handling experience?

Sommer: The publication of open access papers is now a reality and fills a gap in the landscape of medical knowledge transfer. In part because medical institutions/authors retain copyright, our team has published a significant number of papers as Open Access papers. In the case of CVIR Endovascular, the editorial experience has been ideal and we have not been able to detect any difference from traditional journals. However, we have also had negative experiences with other open access journals, e.g., black-box experiences, unrealistic publication costs, unserious reviewer comments, low-quality .pdf, etc.

Impact factor is still an important scientific parameter in many institutions, although other parameters like citation index are becoming more important. How is this in your institution and what is your opinion about this?

Sommer: Compensation by faculty for the publishing clinic is based on a variety of criteria, including impact factor points. Personal bonuses for staff may also be linked to the number of impact factor points accumulated. However, there is also a significant role for journals with low impact factors, for example, if they have a certain tradition or history, or a high reputation within the professional subcommunity. At the Ruperto Carola, the medical faculty requires a relevant number of non-open-access papers for certain qualifications, e.g. for habilitation, because the influence of funding is to be controlled.

Young scientists find it more and more difficult to get their first papers published. Do you think that CVIR Endovascular can play a role in alleviating the situation?

Sommer: Because the technical standards for a publication in CVIR Endovascular are so high, young scientists can gain important experience with a submission. A judiciously conducted peer review is the right tool to improve the scientific content for all readers. As soon as the IR community judges publications in a scientific journal to be poor, the publication medium will in any case be judged to be ineffective and will sooner or later become irrelevant for professionals.

Would you consider submitting your scientific work to CVIR Endovascular again and if so, why?

Sommer: Of course! Not only because we have had good experiences with the publication process, but because we see CVIR Endovascular as a complementary journal to CVIR. CVIR will keep its place for blockbuster publications in interventional radiology and vascular medicine, but will not be able to provide an adequate stage for the softer formats such as "personal opinion", "developing strategy", or “Pictorial Review”.