Most, but not all, clinical veterinary journals have improved publication speed of research articles-another look 6 years on.

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the time from submission to acceptance (review time), acceptance to first online appearance (process time), and total publication time (sum of review and process times) of research publications in a select group of veterinary journals and compare these with results from 2018.

Methods: Data were collected from 30 sequential research articles in each journal in a backward temporal manner starting with December 2024. Data from 2024 and 2018 were compared by use of Mann-Whitney U tests for each journal.

Results: 15 of 23 journals improved their process time; 8 of 23 also slightly improved their review time. Two journals increased their review time: one by 1.5 months and the other by 2.5 months. Thirteen journals improved their total time: 2 by 12 to 24 months. One journal had a total publication time of almost 20 months, whereas most journals had times between 6 and 10 months. Two journals had total publication times < 2 months, despite publishing more articles than the sum of articles published by 22 of 23 other journals.

Conclusions: Most journals improved process time, with some exceptions. Two journals had total times considerably faster than other journals, raising concerns about the quality of the review process in those journals. Several journals had considerable room for improvement in the dissemination of scientific information.

Clinical relevance: Authors can use our data when choosing a journal for their manuscript submissions to expedite the publication process of their research but should be wary of submitting to journals claiming extraordinary publication speeds.