Thirty-five years of JEADV: A conversation with past and present Editors-in-Chief

Abstract

Johannes Ring

Carle Paul

JEADV marks its 35th anniversary at a time of rapid change in dermatology, venereology and scientific publishing. To reflect on the journal's past, present and future, Prof. Johannes Ring, former Editor-in-Chief and Prof. Carle Paul, current Editor-in-Chief, were invited to answer a shared set of questions.

In the following edited Q&A, both editors discuss how JEADV has evolved, what they have learned from leading the journal, and how they see its role in the years ahead.

Ring: As the official journal of the EADV, the journal already had a stable and growing readership with an increasing quality of articles. However, papers were printed strictly in order of acceptance, which made it difficult for the reader to get an overview. There was also a long delay, sometimes more than 1 year, between acceptance and print, and I inherited a backlog of several hundred manuscripts. In addition, the dark red cover appeared somewhat dull.

My aim was to make JEADV more attractive, but the first priority was to reduce the backlog by adding 5 to 10 manuscripts per issue. This was not ideal for the impact factor, which only increased slowly, but it eventually rose from 2.8 to 9.2!

Paul: Thanks to the dedication and hard work of the previous Editors, the JEADV was already a respected, high-profile journal in dermatology and venereology when I succeeded Prof. Johannes Ring in October 2023. Our aim was to further increase physicians' knowledge, promote high-quality medical science and ultimately improve disease understanding and patient outcomes.

In collaboration with the Editorial office in Lugano and the Associate Editors, we developed a strategic plan to strengthen the Journal's profile, visibility and impact. It was built around three main initiatives:

First, we aimed to enhance the quality, impact and readability of the JEADV, while maximizing the author experience. We sought to attract clinical guidelines, position papers, commissioned reviews and primary high-quality clinical trials through proactive engagement with researchers and medical societies. We also wanted to address the most important scientific, social and political challenges our specialty faces through editorials and mini-reviews. In parallel, we expanded the Journal's social media activity and increased the visibility of articles through commentaries, editorials, graphical abstracts, videos and PowerPoint presentations.

Second, we set out to establish a large and robust network of JEADV editors, supported by a collaborative team spirit. A large team of 5 Associate Editors and 17 Section Editors now provides the broad scientific expertise required across the full range of our specialty. The Associate Editors have taken on an expanded role in the Journal's strategy, content development and the manuscript review process, mirroring the workflows of other high-profile medical journals. We also wanted to involve the younger generation of dermatologists in peer review and offer promising early-career researchers, or the young rising stars, who are driven by scientific work and innovation, the opportunity to serve as Junior Editors, contributing to the editorial work, peer review and the journal's strategic development. Regular meetings and forward-looking discussions have helped to create a shared vision for the future of JEADV. We have also sought to draw on the strength and expertise of the wider EADV community, including the Editorial office, Board and Committees, Task Forces and Sister Societies.

Third, we introduced a more rigorous peer-review mechanism to improve the quality of published articles and accelerate editorial decisions. We increased initial editorial screening by the Editor-in-Chief and the Associate Editors so that priority could be given to the strongest submissions.

We also renewed and expanded the pool of reviewers by involving younger dermatologists at the peak of their scientific career and productivity. Our objective was to reduce the time from submission to initial decision to less than one week, giving authors rapid feedback on whether their manuscript was suitable for external review and potential publication.

These initiatives were successfully implemented in 2024 and 2025. They have contributed to JEADV's continued growth and success, helping it become the number one European journal in Dermatology and Venereology in 2026.¹

Ring: There has been volume over the years. The number of submissions rose from around 700 in 2013 to more than 4,000 in 2022. Awareness increased significantly, as reflected in downloads, which grew from 200,000 in 2013 to 900,000 in 2020.

One ongoing challenge has been case reports. These are very important for our specialty, but they tend to be cited only when a similar case is encountered. To address this, the EADV decided to launch a new journal, JEADV Clinical Practice, headed by Antonio Torrelo as the Editor-in-Chief, which is now flourishing.

Paul: The two major changes affecting scientific publishing are the proliferation of medical and scientific journals and the growing role of social media as a channel for information.

There are now more than 100 journals in dermatology and venereology, and it is impossible for any individual to read and digest all the information they publish. At the same time, this expansion means that authors can almost always find a journal in which to publish their work. Critical reading and editorial selectivity are therefore becoming increasingly important. Editors and reviewers need to identify the limitations of submitted articles, help authors address important gaps and interpret the findings appropriately.

In collaboration with the JEADV editorial team, and with a major contribution from our Junior Editors, we have recently developed comprehensive editorial guidance for authors and reviewers on how to write, publish and review scientific manuscripts in the JEADV Publishing Toolkit for Authors & Reviewers.

The importance of social media in disseminating information, including scientific articles, is now enormous. Most of us spend several hours each day on social media, and posts incorporating images, podcasts and videos have become prominent tools for sharing information. Used responsibly, social media can promote useful medical knowledge, including international treatment guidelines, and may ultimately contribute to improved patient outcomes.

We have therefore developed a strong social media strategy in collaboration with the Editorial Office in Lugano and a team of Junior Editors led by Sergio Vañó-Galván. JEADV social media posts now gain more than 2 million views each year.

Ring: We are immensely grateful to Torello Lotti and Derek Freedman, who succeeded in getting the journal listed in Index Medicus, allowing it to obtain an impact factor at an early stage. Jean-Paul Ortonne, with the support of Maryse Clappier, established a strict peer-review system based on scientific quality.

We also changed the appearance of the journal, together with Asao Sarukawa and our medical illustrator Laurence Zulianello, introducing an eye-catching cover design and images that reflect one article from each issue. There has been ongoing discussion about Thematic Issues, but we decided against this approach, with one exception during the COVID-19 pandemic, when a dedicated section was included in each issue. We were fortunate to publish one of the first articles on skin manifestations of COVID-19, which was well cited.² During that period, when daily life was largely under lockdown, many researchers had more time to write, and the submissions increased further, exceeding 750 manuscripts in peak months.

Paul: I am very grateful to every former JEADV Editor-in-Chief and their teams for their contribution to the journal's success. This success has also been made possible by the commitment and expertise of the EADV's 14,000 members, our Associate Editors, Rolland Gyulai, Emek Kocatürk, Jo Lambert, Christian Posch and Sarah Walsh, our 17 Section Editors, authors, reviewers and the dedicated Editorial Office in Lugano led by Asao Sarukawa.

A high-quality journal is like a puzzle made up of many important pieces. When one piece is missing, the whole structure can fall apart.

Ring: The greatest challenge for an editor is to ensure an objective and fair decision-process. This must be free from social influences (‘friends’), political considerations, including society politics, geographic factors (‘we could need a paper from …’), financial pressures from industry and even topical preferences (my own favourite topics). This is not easy, but it can be achieved.

Another major challenge is scientific misconduct and fraud, which unfortunately appear to be increasing. In addition to errors made in good faith such as methodological or statistical weaknesses, there are more serious issues such as data manipulation (trimming, forging or ‘cooking’), as well as outright fabrication of data. Examples range from altered images, including painted transplanted hair or misleading photographs with false legends, to entirely invented experimental results or randomized clinical trials. Fortunately, such cases have been rare, but they require considerable time and effort to investigate, often with the support of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Plagiarism is also an issue, including duplicate publication of the same cases, sometimes with different authors or images, which can give a false impression of originality. The rise of AI will present an additional challenge for scientific publishing.

For me as an editor, the greatest catastrophe would be having to retract a paper because of scientific fraud. Missing a future Nobel prize paper would only rank second.

Paul: My greatest challenge as Editor-in-Chief was realizing the sheer scale of the work involved. With more than 5,000 manuscripts received each year, it is impossible for one person to manage the journal alone.

At the beginning, it was also humbling to recognize the limits of my own knowledge and the crucial need for a high-performing team of editors, reviewers, editorial coordinators, an illustrator and a medical writer to produce each monthly issue of JEADV.

This experience has shaped my approach to leadership. Building a collaborative team culture based on trust, listening, knowledge-sharing and recognition is essential.

Ring: Serving as Editor has greatly enriched my life. It has shown me how diverse and colourful the scientific world is, and how much new information emerges every day. I have also made friends, even among authors whose manuscripts were rejected. In a follow-up study of 2,500 manuscripts rejected by JEADV, around 400 were accepted by other peer-reviewed journals, and five were even published in journals with higher impact factors. This suggests that our system is working reasonably well.

I have become more relaxed in dealing with the more difficult facets of human behaviour such as jealousy, greed, arrogance, recognizing that I am only a small wheel of a much larger process. Others generate the ideas and conduct the work, and others again will read or benefit from it, including patients.

Building a successful journal requires effective teamwork, starting in the editorial office, the selection of Associate and Section Editors, and a committed editorial board. It also depends on an atmosphere of absolute trust and, for certain decisions, confidentiality.

Paul: Leading JEADV has been a fulfilling and rewarding experience, both personally and professionally. I am still very much in the learning phase, and I have great gratitude for everyone who contributes to the Journal.

I am also grateful to the patients who participate in medical research and agree to share their journey in our new JEADV section ‘Patient's Voice’. Their perspectives remind us of the purpose of medical publishing beyond science alone. I hope that we will find further ways to better involve patients in JEADV in the future.

Ring: In one of a series of webinars kindly organized by a publisher, the message to the editors was that ‘the foremost duty of an editor is to provide diversity, equity and inclusion’. I wrote in the group chat: ‘I disagree, the foremost, and indeed the only, duty of an editor is to make a good journal!’. In my view, if you consistently aim for quality, the rest will follow.

Paul: From a scientific standpoint, we must be selective. JEADV aims to compete with the highest-quality medical journals and attract the most impactful papers.

At the same time, the journal must remain inclusive. We need to be attentive to the needs of underrepresented and underserved communities and to address public health issues and political challenges that affect dermatology and venereology. We have published several articles on gender inequities, discrimination and unconscious bias,^{3, 4} and we will continue to give these issues appropriate attention in the future.

Ring: During my time as Editor-in-Chief, the COVID-19 pandemic dominated the medical field and society as a whole for some years, and this was clearly reflected in our journal.

The highest Altmetric score (more than 10,000) was achieved by a commentary from Christian Posch, showing a photograph of a 92-year-old woman with beautifully preserved facial skin but a markedly photoaged, sun-damaged neck region (her explanation was: ‘The doctor told me to apply the cream to my face; he did not mention the neck!’).⁵ One such image can be more educative than many randomized controlled trials.

I also fought to secure publication of major guidelines in our field within JEADV. A record in terms of citation was achieved by the guidelines on hidradenitis suppurativa by Christos Zouboulis, published in 2015, which have since been cited over 1,000 times and remain a key reference in this area.⁶

As an emerging field, I am particularly struck by the rapid progress in skin imaging technologies. I feel this field has advanced to the point that it needs its own journal.

Paul: Clearly, clinical guidelines have had the greatest impact. The two recent guidelines on atopic dermatitis and hidradenitis suppurativa have each been downloaded more than 30,000 times on the journal's page on Wiley Online Library.^{7, 8} This confirms the central role of JEADV in disseminating practical, evidence-based recommendations that support clinicians and improve patient care.

The concept of personalized medicine, as explored in the March 2026 issue of JEADV, is evidently a fascinating topic. The prospect of tailoring diagnosis, treatment, and prevention to the characteristics of each individual patient is a fascinating development for dermatology.⁹

Ring: Opportunities are immense as there is an increasing need for information at many levels: for the experts, the colleagues, the allied health professionals, patients and the general public. They all need to be provided with reliable, evidence-based information. Additional sister or partner journals may be created to meet these needs.

AI is not a threat, but a new technology that must be used wisely.

Digital publishing is already part of our daily life, as is engagement with social media. During my tenure, we established a dedicated social media editor, and this role has been further developed by my successor.

Another threat is the flood of predatory journals, which make money from the ambitions of young authors who pay to be published, only for their work to disappear into a kind of garbage ‘orcus’.

The greatest threat is fake news and organized disinformation. My liberal soul resists the idea, but there may come a time when society feels compelled to create an index of ‘forbidden’ articles or books that are ‘not recommended’ for reading. For ordinary citizens, it is almost impossible to distinguish reliably between truth and falsehood.

Paul: Maintaining scientific integrity will be essential, particularly as we seek to address artificial intelligence and its role in scientific publishing with greater transparency. AI offers important opportunities, but journals must set clear boundaries for its use and ensure it does not undermine trust in the scientific record.

Digital publishing and social media will remain valuable ways to share knowledge quickly and widely. At the same time, we need to maintain genuine human connection beyond digital platforms. This is why I strongly believe in the bright future of medical societies such as the EADV, which bring people together to exchange knowledge, build trust, and sustain our professional community.

Ring: Attract the best articles, treat authors well, and trust both your gut feeling and your team in a fair review process free from external influence. In the end, you are the one who shapes this journal!

Paul: My main message would be: build a great team around you and, as Muriel Strode wrote, ‘Do not go where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail’.