Update: Medical Journal of Australia editorial advisors resign over Leeder sacking, Elsevier outsourcing

0
238

Most of the 22 editorial advisors to the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) are expected to announce their resignation on the weekend in protest at the sacking of editor-in-chief Professor Stephen Leeder and the outsourcing of production to global publishing company Elsevier.

Leeder told Croakey he had been shocked at the way he was sacked this week by the Australasian Medical Publishing Company (AMPCo), a fully owned subsidiary of the Australian Medical Association (AMA). See the ABC’s story http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-01/academic-outrage-as-leading-health-journal-editor-sacked/6435850

“I thought it was pretty brutal,” he said. “It was the most humiliating professional experience I’ve ever had, I think, being marched up to my office and supervised (while I packed up my desk) and then marched out of the building as if I was a 10 year old with my hands caught in the cookie jar.”

“I’m very sad and bereaved and humiliated,” he said.

Leeder is an emeritus professor of public health and community medicine at the University of Sydney, and chair of the Western Sydney Local Health District Board. He was appointed editor-in-chief of the MJA, the 101-year old peer-reviewed medical journal, in 2013. Differences with AMPCo were also blamed for the departure of his predecessor, Dr Annette Katelaris.

Editorial advisory committee members Professors Gary Wittert , Head of the Discipline of Medicine at Adelaide University and Michael Horowitz, Professor of Medicine at Adelaide University, said they were “astonished” at what had happened, and described Leeder’s sacking as “outrageous”. In a statement they told Croakey:

“Professor Leeder is a man of outstanding intellect and integrity. We consider that the MJA was extremely fortunate to have the services of an Editor of this calibre and regard his stewardship of the MJA to have been exceptional.”

“The majority, if not all board members, including ourselves have indicated they will resign and believe that the Australian medical community, who we understand have not been consulted will be appropriately outraged.”

Croakey understands the MJA’s deputy editor Dr Tania Janusic resigned on Friday and medical editor of MJAInsight publication Ruth Armstrong has given notice, in protest at the decision to sack Leeder.

Caroline De Costa, who is also on the advisory committee, said committee members were concerned that up to half of the 24 MJA staff members would lose their jobs under the outsourcing proposal, and that the MJA would lose significant local editorial experience and expertise as a result.

They also had “ethical concerns” about contracting to Elsevier, in particular around a 2009 scandal when it was discovered to have been paid by the Australian affiliate of Merck paid Elsevier to publish the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, without declaration.

As the New York Times reported at the time:

The Merck marketing compilation was unusual in that it looked like an independent peer-reviewed medical journal. It even called itself a “journal,” without indicating in any of the issues that Merck had paid for it.

“That is very worrying,” said de Costa, who is Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at James Cook University College of Medicine in Cairns.

Editorial committee members wrote earlier this week to AMPCo, she said, expressing their concerns, including that there had been no real consultation over the outsourcing plans with Leeder and that an alternative plan, which would have retained local staff for a similar outlay as would be paid to Elsevier, was not accepted.

“We got a very non-committal reply,” she said.

Leeder said he had not been consulted about the outsourcing proposal until the bid from Elsevier had been considered by the Board. He had “strongly” objected to both its decision to outsource production of the journal and its selection of Elsevier.”I have concerns about outsourcing, and major ethical concerns with Elsevier,” he said.

De Costa said the departures of two editors-in-chief in unhappy circumstance did not augur well for the future and she had been “utterly appalled” to learn how Leeder was sacked and escorted from the MJA office. “I think they would have great difficulty finding someone who wants to put their hand up and be MJA editor now,” she said.

AMPCo released a statement on Wednesday announcing that Leeder would “conclude his tenure” at the MJA “effective immediately”. It said: “Whilst Professor Leeder and the Board remain committed to the Journal, unfortunately we cannot reach agreement on the necessary steps required to ensure its future success.”

An AMPCo spokesperson, contacted via the company’s PR agency, responded to the committee’s concerns with the following:

“It was after considerable due diligence that the Board resolved to outsource sub-editing, production and some administration functions of the MJA to Elsevier to ensure the continued success of the journal.  Any queries that were put to the Board about Elsevier were completely and comprehensively addressed to the full satisfaction of the Board. ”

“In addition, the MJA Editor and AMPCo will remain editorially independent. AMPCo is responsible for content acquisition, direction, development and review. The proposed agreement from Elsevier is to provide fee-for-service in sub-editing, proof reading and typesetting only on AMPCo’s behalf. The final approval for print rests with MJA staff.”

“Editorial independence, content development and discretion will remain with the editorial team in the Australasian Medical Publishing Company (AMPCo) ensuring, contributors, readers and other key stakeholders that today’s exacting quality and integrity standards remain the hallmarks of this prestigious Journal well into the future. The responsibility for the content of the Journal will remain with the in-house editorial team and distinguished contributors. ”

“In order to allow the MJA to continue to respond to evolving events in Australia, Elsevier has arranged for copy editing and layout for sections of the journal requiring flexible timescales to be handled locally within Australia. We believe that this, combined with the flexible availability of skilled native English speaking copy editors around the world (who effectively extend the hours of operation due to the time differences), will provide the capacity required to fit with MJA timelines. In addition, it is our understanding there will be back-up support provided by AMPCo for these last minute changes.”

Asked what impact the mass resignation of MJA’s editorial advisory committee would have on the operation and reputation of the MJA, the spokesperson said:

“We are confident that the Medical Journal of Australia will remain the leading provider of Australian clinical research, evidence-based reviews and debate on the important issues affecting Australian health care.”

With Professor Paul Zimmet, from Melbourne’s Baker IDI Heart & Diabetes Centre, Wittert said he had written to AMA president Dr Brian Owler to express “serious concern” about the outsourcing of the MJA production to Elsevier and Leeder’s consequent sacking.

“We find it disturbing that AMPCo has taken this action despite the record of Elsevier,” the letter said. “We call on the AMA to investigate the circumstances of this arrangement struck between AMPCo and Elsevier and its implications for ethical publishing in our national medical journal.”

Wittert also tweeted that the AMPCo board should resign over the decision.

A spokesman for the AMA declined to comment on the dispute, saying AMPCo was a separate entity and the AMA sought to protect its independence.