scholarly journals Time to be Alert!! Stay Safe from the Omicron Variant of COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. EC1-EC2
Author(s):  
Sahil Thakar
Keyword(s):  

Editorial Comment By Dr. Sahil Thakar on Behalf of the Editorial Board, IHRJ

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-68
Author(s):  
David C. Johnson

In this second issue of JRME the Editorial Board has again attempted to provide the reader with a variety of topics. While the subjects are primarily elementary school children, the areas of research include strategies for solving multiplication combinations, discovery learning, instructional strategies, and the relationship between teacher expectancy and student achievement.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (7) ◽  
pp. 219-220
Author(s):  
Packo Dieu-le-Veut Saint-cyr Sylvestre ◽  
Feigoudozoui Hermann Victoire

Editorial Comment by Dr. Packo Dieu-le-veut Saint-Cyr Sylvestre, Member, International Editorial Board, IHRJ and Dr. Feigoudozoui Hermann Victoire


1971 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 243
Author(s):  
David C. Johnson

This issue of JRME includes a selected annotated bibliography of research reported in 1970. The listing has been an annual feature in the Arithmetic Teacher; however, the Mathematics Teacher and the Arithmetic Teacher panels have established new policies regarding the publishing of research articles and indicated that the annotated listing more appropri ately belongs in JRME. To make the listing more comprehensive—the material previously reported in the Arithmetic Teacher was usually restricted to research in elementary education, K–8—Suydam and Weaver have extended the bibliography to include research pertaining to secondary school mathematics. With this expansion the final listing should be of considerable value to mathematics education researchers. On behalf of the JRME subscribers and the Editorial Board a special thank you is extended to the authors for their efforts. Present plans for JRME include provisions for the bibliography to appear as an annual feature, published in each November issue.


1971 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-68
Author(s):  
James W. Wilson

One of the early decisions of the JRME Editorial Board (December 1968) was to occasionally devote a special issue of the journal to a review and analysis of a major research project. The first project chosen for discussion in a special issue was the International Study of Achievement in Mathematics.


1972 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
David C. Johnson

The Editor has received correspondence in which recommendations were made for improving JRME—i.e., how the Journal might provide a greater service to the mathematics education community. Two of these letters, Bright and Romberg, each with an Editor's reply, appear in this issue. In each letter a rationale is presented for the inclusion of additional “types” of articles. Such letters are appreciated and readers are encouraged to communicate reactions and suggestions for improvement to the Editor and/or Editorial Board members.


2016 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-375

Many papers submitted to the Edinburgh Journal of Botany are reviewed by members of the Editorial Board and Editorial Advisory Board. The members of both Boards wish to express their thanks to the following, who have also kindly reviewed papers during the preparation of this volume.


1990 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
M. J. Brown

From this issue, Clinical Science will increase its page numbers from an average of 112 to 128 per monthly issue. This welcome change — equivalent to at least two manuscripts — has been ‘forced’ on us by the increasing pressure on space; this has led to an undesirable increase in the delay between acceptance and publication, and to a fall in the proportion of submitted manuscripts we have been able to accept. The change in page numbers will instead permit us now to return to our exceptionally short interval between acceptance and publication of 3–4 months; and at the same time we shall be able not only to accept (as now) those papers requiring little or no revision, but also to offer hope to some of those papers which have raised our interest but come to grief in review because of a major but remediable problem. Our view, doubtless unoriginal, has been that the review process, which is unusually thorough for Clinical Science, involving a specialist editor and two external referees, is most constructive when it helps the evolution of a good paper from an interesting piece of research. Traditionally, the papers in Clinical Science have represented some areas of research more than others. However, this has reflected entirely the pattern of papers submitted to us, rather than any selective interest of the Editorial Board, which numbers up to 35 scientists covering most areas of medical research. Arguably, after the explosion during the last decade of specialist journals, the general journal can look forward to a renaissance in the 1990s, as scientists in apparently different specialities discover that they are interested in the same substances, asking similar questions and developing techniques of mutual benefit to answer these questions. This situation arises from the trend, even among clinical scientists, to recognize the power of research based at the cellular and molecular level to achieve real progress, and at this level the concept of organ-based specialism breaks down. It is perhaps ironic that this journal, for a short while at the end of the 1970s, adopted — and then discarded — the name of Clinical Science and Molecular Medicine, since this title perfectly represents the direction in which clinical science, and therefore Clinical Science, is now progressing.


Urology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 146 ◽  
pp. 276-277
Author(s):  
David A. Goldfarb
Keyword(s):  

Urology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 293
Author(s):  
Jonathan N. Warner
Keyword(s):  

Urology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 160-161
Author(s):  
Anthony Hiffa ◽  
Christopher J.D. Wallis ◽  
Zachary Klaassen
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document