点击显示 收起
1 From the US Department of Agriculture/Agricultural Research Service Children's Nutrition Research Center, Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
2 Reprints not available. Address correspondence to DM Bier, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, 1100 Bates Street, Houston, TX 77030-2600. E-mail: dbier{at}bcm.tmc.edu.
In the fall of 1952, just shy of 55 years ago, the first issue of The Journal of Clinical Nutrition appeared, preceding the founding of The American Society for Clinical Nutrition by 6 y. Renamed The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN) in 1954, the Journal has had a continuous, distinguished, and enviable record of scientific excellence under the guidance of only 8 Editors-in-Chief. I've had the pleasure to know 5 and be a friend of 3. Although it is a distinct honor to be the ninth Editor-in-Chief, it is likewise a humbling experience because of the accomplishments of those who have gone before me. Together, the former editors have made the AJCN the world's most widely recognized, peer-reviewed clinical nutrition journal. Also, it is a truly daunting task to assume the editorship after the last Editor-in-Chief, Dr Charles Halsted, because he has accomplished nearly every goal that an editor of a scientific journal might strive for and has implemented essentially all of the improvements necessary to keep the AJCN both competitive among its peers in the current digital world and desirable to its diverse global readership. The success of his more than 11-year editorial tenure is amply demonstrated by the fact that the AJCN received 1270 original research manuscripts in 2006, 63% more than were submitted when Halsted assumed the editorship. Because of this high submission rate, the AJCN can be highly selective, accepting only 28% of the original research manuscripts received—a stringency that results in volumes of the highest scientific quality. The quality of the articles is supported objectively by the most recent AJCN impact factor of 5.853.
Where does one go from there? As attributed to many (1), "It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." So a safer option is to look at the past. I did so to compose this editorial, and Halsted did so when the Journal turned 50 (2). Not surprisingly, we both realized that the initial editors "got it right," in no small part because they recognized the value of nutrition research for preventing the diseases that are still the principal contributors to mortality worldwide and because they were determined that the Journal would provide a forum for publication of research into the mechanisms responsible for nutrition's influence on disease prevention. Thus, the inaugural issue contains articles on the role of nutrition in hypertension, alcoholism, growth failure, vitamin A and amino acid deficiencies, low-cholesterol diets, and "overnutrition and obesity"—topics that might easily appear in the AJCN today (2).
The opening article of the first issue in 1952, authored by Charles Glen King, was titled "Basic Research and its Application in the Field of Clinical Nutrition" (3). I find it impossible to improve on this title as the principal goal of the incoming editors. It is our firm belief that the single factor that determines the fate of a research journal is its scientific integrity. In this context, we define integrity as all the essential factors that, taken together, specify the validity of the material published therein. These factors include, but are not limited to, addressing issues of fundamental scientific merit in an unbiased manner by nonconflicted investigators and presenting the results from a balanced perspective after rigorous statistical scrutiny and critical peer review.
Although King (3) does not use the word translation in his article, he would presumably be delighted to learn today that he advocated translational medicine before it was in vogue. Similarly, he would be happy to know that his 4 goals for nutrition scientists remain as pertinent today as they were when he wrote the inaugural article. Specifically, nutrition scientists "want to be able to identify and measure the concentration of all useful ingredients in human and animal foods. Second, they want to know how each nutrient functions in living organisms, and how these functions interlink, one with another. Third, they want to know the quantitative relations between nutrient intake and health on a life span basis. And fourth, they sense an obligation to assist in the educational activities that will make their work effective in the community at large." Once again, this succinct statement needs no modification today. Perhaps most gratifying in the context of recent nutrition translation messages emphasizing foods and dietary patterns instead of nutrients, King develops the case that findings of good, translational nutrition research provide "strong support to the view that in the development of practical plans for good nutrition, one must look on the diet pattern as a whole and not be misled by overemphasis on the supply of individual nutrients at specific levels. The primary educational measures should be based on educating the public to consume liberal quantities of reliable protective foods" (3). Thus, I might add, Plus ça change..., and argue that the ever rising and extending canopy of the AJCN evolutionary tree is supported by the depth of its initial roots.
The new editors have no uprooting plans. All the well-appreciated, established features of the AJCN will remain, including editorials, commentaries, and reviews. Likewise, the scope of the Journal will continue to cover the broadest range of clinical nutrition research themes. At the same time, the new editors appreciate that the sphere of nutritionally relevant sciences has surely expanded beyond the domains initially envisioned by the Journal's founders, and we intend to make a serious effort to attract research articles of merit from all disciplines that have relevance to clinical nutrition. Acceptance of such articles will be limited only by scientific quality, not by topic. The new editors are also eager to expand the publication of systematic reviews of clinically relevant topics. In fact, a realistic goal is to become the principal source for such reviews in clinical nutrition and the repository of evidence-based classification of practice guidelines in this area. The editors are also discussing new features that we believe will be of interest to the readership, such as "Tools for Translation," which will highlight new techniques or methods that should be applied more regularly to interdisciplinary nutrition research; "Tools for Interpretation," which will analyze in detail the theoretical and practical strengths and weaknesses of the fundamental tools widely used in nutrition research; and "Boundaries of Our Knowledge," which will be articles written by acknowledged leaders in specific fields of nutrition research describing the fundamental questions that must be answered or limitations that must be overcome to move the field forward. Finally, we are anxious to improve the Journal's website by increasing the amount of information available and by allowing for the ability to download figures as PowerPoint slides, an option initiated by Halsted and already in the planning stage.
From a practical standpoint, the operations of the editorial office will be more widely distributed than in the past. The advances in electronic manuscript submission and processing that have taken place over the past decade make this possible. Thus, the new Associate Editors, all highly competent nutrition scientists in their own right, are geographically distributed: Naomi Fukagawa is on the faculty of the University of Vermont (Burlington, VT), Frank Sacks is a member of the Harvard University faculty (Boston, MA), Barbara Bowman is on the staff of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Atlanta, GA), David Klurfeld is a scientist at the US Department of Agriculture/Agricultural Research Service (Beltsville, MD), Jonathan Gitlin is on the faculty of Washington University School of Medicine (St Louis, MO), and Steven Abrams is a member of the Baylor College of Medicine faculty (Houston, TX), as is the Editor-in-Chief. The Assistant Editor, D'Ann Finley, will remain at the University of California (Davis, CA). It is conceivable that more Associate Editors will be added as we gain experience with the specific areas of research expertise needed. Additionally, the new operational model for the Associate Editors is more closely aligned with that of The Journal of Nutrition, not only in view of their geographical distribution, but also because each Associate Editor will have direct responsibility for the individual articles assigned to him or her. The remaining members of the Editorial Board, who were appointed by Halsted, will complete their respective terms, and new members will be appointed as they retire.
The new editors are cognizant of the need for transparency with reference to potential conflicts of interest in the exercise of their responsibilities to the Journal, the authors, the referees, the American Society for Nutrition, and the reader. For this reason, we have developed a Conflict of Interest policy that also appears in this issue of the AJCN.
Finally, while looking forward to a bright future, I am not going to be driven by trying to second guess it. The best science is generally the most unexpected science. Rather, I expect to build on the foundations laid down by the Journal's founders and will consider each day the first day of the future. This position is not particularly new, Horace (Odes, I-XI) stated such more than 2 millennia ago, "Dum loquimur, fugerit invida aetas: carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero," "While we are talking, grudging time will have fled: seize the day, trusting as little as possible to the future."
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author had no personal or financial conflict of interest relevant to the statements expressed in this article.
REFERENCES