To continue to improve the editorial content of the website, we are considering these changes, and welcome your comments to Dr. Pernick at NatPernick@hotmail.com:
1. We are seeking experts to serve on our Editorial Board to provide a secondary review of topics as they are updated. Editorial Board members are listed on the Reviewers page, on the relevant Chapter page, and on all topics that they review. Editorial Board members are responsible for providing this secondary review for at least 10 topics per year. This means that another reviewer will update the topic, and then the Editorial Board member will review it again, using their expertise, to look for any deficiencies. Editorial Board members will also be expected to find (primary) reviewers for at least 10 topics each year. Although this position is unpaid, we may have special promotions for Editorial Board members during the year.
2. Currently, the 7000 topics on our website are in different stages of "maturity". For "mature" topics, which have been reviewed several times and are of high caliber, we will now require additional reviews to be by a recognized expert for this specialty. For topics with sparse information, the reviewer need not be a recognized expert, and could be a pathologist who is a good writer or a resident/fellow working under a staff. As indicated above, we anticipate that the completed product will be reviewed by an Editorial Board member.
3. It is hard to get enough primary reviewers for our 7000 topics, particularly reviewers with recognized expertise. Would increasing the rate from $10 per topic make a difference?
Let me know what you think.