Editorial project structure and process

Although each editorial project  is different, they typically have similar components and process, which helps each editor jump in and feel at home. 

Structure

In progress projects are listed on the editorial projects page. Proposed projects that have not yet started (we typically limit the number of concurrent projects to ~6 to ensure we are completing them quickly) are listed on the proposed editorial projects page. 

Each project is typically described with the following structure: 

Title 
  • Type: there are qualitatively different types of projects, and more will become apparent as we do these. Some that clearly are possibilities are: 
    • topic cluster improvements
    • case improvements 
    • audit and structure improvements
    • create missing articles
  • Scope/endpoints: a description of what is considered “in scope” for each project and what the end point is considered to be.. 
  • Duration
  • Team: this will vary from project to project… think in terms of how many people can work in parallel 
  • Review: who is in charge of reviewing work and giving feedback / signing off on it
  • Follow-up: what additional work might need to be completed following this project? It may be that additional projects are spawned.

Process

Picking the team

There are no hard and fast rules about who should be the 'lead' in a project, but generally this will be a senior editor or editor. Some projects may well be appropriate for subeditors to be involved in. Non editorial contributors may also be invited to participate. 

If there is a project you are interested in, either give a general shout out to the editorial board as a whole by email, or contact someone specific directly. When a full team is assembled the project will move to 'in progress' on this page. 

The mechanics

Although there will be very different requirements for different projects, in most instances a comprehensive review of both articles and cases will be required. Please familiarise yourself with the following articles: 

  1. existing article review process
  2. existing case review process

The project team should correspond among themselves and set up whatever additional supporting documentation as the project requires (e.g. spreadsheet of cases etc..) If a list of such cases is required as an extract form the site, please contact Frank or Jeremy to organise. 

If at any point the project stalls, or there are issues / questions that cannot be resolved internally please contact the one of the managing editors. For guidance, feel free to contact a relevant expert advisor, but ensure that you do not overwhelm them. 

Review

Once the project is completed, please let the relevant 'review team' know. This is a final check to make sure that everything has gone according to plan. The reviewers will typically be a senior editor with subspecialty interest in that field (preferable) and an expert advisor. 

Once that is completed, we will ask the team to write a blog post and the project will be moved to the 'completed' section below. 


Help and Style Guide
Share article

Article Information

rID: 42170
Tag: help
Synonyms or Alternate Spellings:

Support Radiopaedia and see fewer ads

Updating… Please wait.
Loadinganimation

Alert accept

Error Unable to process the form. Check for errors and try again.

Alert accept Thank you for updating your details.