Moving on up: the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle

As the editors of the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle (JCSM), we are proud to announce that the journal has maintained its impact factor, which has now been published by Thomson Scientific as 7.3, placing it number 9 in the ranking of all journals in the field ‘Medicine, General and Internal’ (Table ​1)1) and number 3 among all nutrition journals, among which, however, JCSM is not offficially listed (Table ​2).2). The number of submissions has increased over the last year, but because we decided to stick with four print issues per year, this also means that our rejection rate is now in excess of 80% of submitted articles. Indeed, at the time of this writing, on 9 July 2015, the journal has received 106 submissions in 2015 alone (Figure ​1).1). We are working hard to provide a timely peer review, which is not always easy as it is difficult at times to find appropriate reviewers. In addition, the journal aims to cover not only clinical medicine but also basic research into cachexia, sarcopenia, and muscle pathophysiology in its broadest sense. Authors can help in speeding the review process by suggesting referees who are able to provide a balanced, however, unbiased comment. Table 1 Top 10 journals in the field ‘Medicine: General & Internal’, adapted from reference 31 Table 2 Top 10 journals in the field ‘Nutrition & Dietetics’, where the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle is officially not listed, adapted from reference 31 Figure 1 Number of manuscript submissions to the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle by year of publication. *Numbers for 2015 are estimated on the number of submissions until 9 July 2015 (reprinted from von Haehling and Anker32). It does not come as a major surprise that among the best cited articles since the first publication of the JCSM are those that are available for the longest time, that is, those published in 2010 and 2011 (Table ​3).3). Editorials like our ‘facts and numbers’ series that try to summarize knowledge of a specific field in a comprehensive way remain a publication type that we are very much in favour of. This is also highlighted by the popularity of editorials published in 2014 (Tables ​44 and ​and5).5). We invite scientists to submit such editorials with as many facts and figures as possible on a topic of interest to our readership to submit their work for consideration. Table 3 Top 10 of the best cited articles since first publication of the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Table 4 Top 10 of the best cited articles published in 2013 in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Table 5 Top 10 of the best cited articles published in 2014 in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle