blog

Ian Beales is a Clinical Senior Lecturer in Cell Biology and Gastroenterology at the University of East Anglia. He has published several papers in F1000Research, and is taking full advantage of the fact that we publish all sound science – not necessarily only large groundbreaking research projects. In this interview, he talks about the work he published with us, and the response he has received.

 

What is your research group working on?

We are currently working on a variety of projects generally looking at pathogenesis of, and treatments for, inflammatory gastrointestinal luminal diseases. These span full blown clinical trials to case-control studies of risk factors to pure laboratory studies examining the underlying molecular mechanisms. One of the main focuses is on the mechanisms by which factors released from adipose tissue contribute to gastrointestinal diseases. In addition we usually have several medical students doing small, often related projects as part of their course of study.

 

You have several publications in F1000Research. Why did you choose to submit your work here?

I am fully supportive of this new initiative in publishing and have from the being have been a strong advocate of open-access models and I always wanted to support F1000Research.

My initial publication in F1000Research was in fact a small, proof of concept study, that I did as part of my own MD thesis some time ago. This eventually did not form part of the final thesis and, although the results were interesting, the rest of my thesis explored other avenues. The advent of F1000Research seemed to provide the ideal avenue to publish this work, which although scientifically sound and demonstrating novel effects of gastrin and gastrin-related peptides, did not include the detailed mechanistic follow-up studies usually required in a traditional full paper. F1000Research provided the forum to demonstrate these effects and report on the success of the model system used.

Subsequently I have published other papers in F1000Research, based on Medical Student projects, which by their very nature are relatively small scale and perhaps peripheral to a larger project. F1000Research proved to be an ideal forum to publish these relatively small but self-contained projects.

 

What, in your opinion, are the benefits of publishing small units of research?

The ability to publish small but valid units of research has enabled me to disseminate new information on the biological effects of gastrointestinal peptides and the successful use of novel cell culture systems.  Sometimes small projects generate an informative positive or in fact negative result as regards to methodologies or effects but time, priorities or funding availabilities do not allow these to be followed up in a larger traditional study.

These small units of research often can be valuable to others in related fields and it has been interesting and exciting to note how many other researchers have contacted me subsequently concerning our small projects, seeing the value of the methodology and how this could be applied to some collaborative working.

 

How did you find the publishing process at F1000Research?

The process went very smoothly, especially considering it was a very new enterprise. The communication and feedback, as well as the editing from the staff were excellent. The final version looks excellent. If I were being critical,  I could say that getting some of the peer-review feedback took perhaps longer than either I or F1000Research anticipated, but I have no doubt this will improve with time with a larger, more comprehensive set of reviewers available.

 

[Editor’s note: On average, it currently takes two weeks for the first referee comment to appear after publication, and some papers have gone through peer review within 24 hours. If you’re interested in becoming a referee for F1000Research, please see our referee guidelines and referee incentives for more information.]