The journal ombudsperson: a step toward scientific press oversight

In 1994, Doug Altman invited the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors to consider how it might help authors who had complaints about editors. The concern that editors abuse the power and trust invested in them by authors, readers, and publishers had grown with the careful documentation of instances of unambiguous editorial misconduct. One obstacle to their proposal was the logistic complexity of coordinating, at the international level, an appeals procedure through a single body. In an effort to open a wider discussion about editorial accountability, The Lancet established an ombudsperson in July 1996. Clear criteria, based on the UK Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, were drawn up. Our ombudsman could investigate delays in handling manuscripts and letters; editorial discourtesy; failure to follow stated editorial procedures; failure to take reasonable account of representations by authors and readers; and challenges to the publishing ethics of the journal. Complaints about the substance of editorial decisions were ruled out of the ombudsman's remit. Twenty complaints were recorded in the first 18 months, 11 of which were upheld. The appointment of an ombudsperson should be considered by editors of all scientific journals. Benefits go well beyond immediate complaints, drawing an editor's attention, for example, to the importance of efficient and courteous journal processes. No discernible harm was discovered. A case still remains for wider oversight of the biomedical press.