Following a five-year term as editor in chief of Arthritis Care & Research (AC&R), Kelli Allen, PhD, is beginning another five-year stint with the journal, but now as co-editor in chief (co-EiC) with Daniel K. White, PT, ScD, who had formerly served as an AC&R associate editor. Dr. Allen is professor of medicine in the Division of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and research health scientist at the Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare System in Durham, N.C. Dr. White is an associate professor in the Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Delaware, Newark.
Both Dr. Allen and Dr. White are energized by this opportunity to work together and ensure the journal stays true to its mission of bringing high-quality research to its broad readership.
The Rheumatologist (TR) asked Dr. Allen and Dr. White why they joined up for the co-EiC approach to AC&R, and what they hope to accomplish in their joint five-year term.
TR: To begin, please give our readers a short overview of your professional backgrounds.
Dr. Kelli Allen
Dr. Allen: I started out in exercise science and really enjoyed working on clinical trials of behavioral interventions for people who had osteoarthritis and other rheumatic conditions. From there, I went to graduate school to work on a doctorate in biobehavioral health and continue to do research focused on arthritis. I remain motivated by trying to improve care and outcomes for people who have chronic pain-related conditions.
Dr. White: I am a physical therapist and rehabilitation scientist with a deep interest in physical activity and physical function in adults with arthritis, and this really comes from seeing many of my patients whose pain and functional limitations could have been lessened with an active lifestyle. My interest in rheumatology specifically came from doing what turned into a seven-year postdoctoral fellowship at Boston University’s Medical Center under the mentorship of David Felson, MD, MPH, professor of rheumatology, and Tuhina Neogi, MD, PhD, chief of rheumatology at Boston Medical Center. During that time, I developed a deep interest in rheumatology, particularly adult knee osteoarthritis. Eventually, I moved to the University of Delaware, where I began conducting my own studies and my own trials, and that’s what I’ve been doing for the past 10 years.
TR: How did the idea arise to shift from one editor in chief of AC&R to a co-EiC structure?
Dr. Daniel White
Dr. White: Kelli and I have known one another for more than 20 years through our volunteer work at the ARP, by attending Convergence, and through some other work we’ve done together. One of her roles as EiC is to think about who is going to take that role next, and I was fortunate enough to get a call from her. When she was talking to me about it, I was very interested, but at the same time, I knew she had this wealth of experience in leading the journal. So I thought, let’s do this together as a team. That would not only manage the workload, but teamwork is emblematic of science in general, where the greatest innovations come through collaboration.
Dr. Allen: The idea of co-EiCs isn’t new to ACR journals, so when the ACR put out its call for applications for the upcoming five-year EiC term for AC&R, Dan and I decided to apply that way. After all, we already had a good collaborative relationship, both with AC&R and outside it, so we thought a co-editorship would be fun.
TR: What will the co-EiC approach look like?
Dr. Allen: This co-leadership role with Dan is more than an opportunity to share the day-to-day handling of manuscripts. It’s also an opportunity to share the vision between two people with different and complementary skill sets and backgrounds, and allow a bit more capacity to do the big-picture thinking, as well as running the mechanics.
Dr. White: There’s a pleasure that comes from being able to take a first look at science that is emerging. It’s very exciting to see a manuscript and think, ‘Wow, this could be the next up-and-coming thing.’ And sometimes, it will be that cut-and-dried in accepting an article for publication or, unfortunately, determining that a manuscript is not ready for prime time yet. But then there are also in-between submissions, where sidebar conversations are necessary to determine whether a manuscript should be accepted … or not. In those cases, it’s much better to have a discussion, make sure we get a decision right and make sure we get it right for the right reasons. Having that shared responsibility in the framework allows us to check with each other and be more confident in the decisions that we make.
TR: Dr. White, you are new to the job of co-EiC. What perspective do you bring to AC&R?
Dr. White: Kelli has a very deep understanding of methodology and has used innovative clinical trial designs in her research. I am a physical therapist and clinician scientist, who always thought very clinically about problems. My goal is to promote the very clinical nature of AC&R that is already there, and really address many of the obstacles that we currently have that are limiting the care we provide to kids and to adults with rheumatic conditions. I think our combined experience and wide spectrum of scientific methods and approaches bring a nice breadth to the table.
TR: What do you see as some of the current challenges for research, for the journal and for the discipline, and how might the journal address them?
Dr. Allen: For researchers, one major challenge is the increasing time spent finding funding, which can potentially affect productivity, including being able to write manuscripts. Nonetheless, AC&R has continued to receive a high volume of manuscripts, which is encouraging, and we’ll watch that to see if that changes over time.
In the meantime, our goal at AC&R is to help the many dedicated rheumatology researchers out there to publish and disseminate their work. Although we can’t directly impact the funding landscape, we can take steps to make paper submissions easier. We want the process of submitting it, getting reviews and responding to reviews to be as smooth as possible. We know there are always things we can improve, and we’re working on ways to make that a more efficient process.
Dr. White: One of the initiatives we recently implemented at AC&R is an online system in which researchers can basically upload their entire manuscript, and the system automatically arranges it into the AC&R format: It finds the title, the abstract and all the references, and puts it all into place. That may not sound very exciting, but to the researcher, it may make the difference between deciding to submit a manuscript to AC&R or not. We want the most innovative, high-quality work in the journal, and easing that process is a way to encourage it.
On another front, I think it’s very important that the journal is supportive of the investigators who are submitting their science to us. This especially applies to young investigators because they are going to hold the torch moving forward.
TR: How does the journal encourage the next generation?
Dr. White: First, when we read articles, we put the time into getting quality reviews. That is helpful for everyone, but particularly for early career researchers, who can then take those reviews to enrich not only that article, but their approach to science moving forward in an independent fashion. It’s a growth mindset: Our work can be better, and the peer-review process is a key part of that. That’s why it is so important to deliver quality reviews that are set in a teachable sort of tone.
Second, ACR journals have a mentorship program, Rheum with a (re)View, that teaches early career investigators how to review articles. This program has a formal system in which the early career investigator does the manuscript review under the oversight of a later career person. This cultivates up-and-coming scientists by giving them recognition as a reviewer and also helping them understand what makes a good article, which enriches their own science. That helps everybody.
TR: Do you have any other plans for the journal?
Dr. Allen: One of the things that has changed gradually is the way people consume scientific information. ACR journals, as a whole, have podcasts, graphical abstracts and similar things so we can reach busy people. At AC&R, we, of course, want people to read the full manuscripts, but we also see the importance of disseminating snippets—the important points of the manuscripts—so that as many people as possible are aware of at least the key messages. To that end, we have already begun using social media and other avenues to do that, and are continuing to think about new ways to get those key messages in front of researchers, as well as patients and clinicians.
Overall, though, transitions in the editorial team really are natural opportunities to reflect and think about options for innovations that strengthen the journal. I’m sure there will be some new things, and we’re excited to see how those will roll out.
TR: Finally, for those readers who may know you only professionally or who may not have met you yet, would you like to share something about yourself on a more personal level?
Dr. Allen: Here are a few things I love: my wonderful husband and two sons, the outdoors, roadside produce stands and anything with ginger!
Dr. White: Well, I have a large family (a wife and six kids). I do enjoy photography, especially taking photos of people. It’s funny, but you can work with people your whole life, but never have a photo of them, so I take a lot of candid and portrait-type headshots to try to capture someone’s personality and speak to who they are. In fact, I often bring my camera to a conference, including Convergence, so you may see me out there taking pictures of my trainees in front of their posters or snapping photos of colleagues. It’s a lot of fun!
Leslie Mertz, PhD, is a freelance science journalist based in northern Michigan.