Editorials have different objectives in a scientific journal. Some highlight a specific article from an issue, which are called “Editor’s Choice”. Others address important aspects of the editorial policy that help authors choose the journal to submit their articles, mainly providing an answer to a common question authors have: “Is my article really suitable for the CSP?” Editorials also show the opinion of the editorial board on aspects of the scientific work in the journal field - in the case of the CSP, Public Health, and its view and political positioning regarding relevant topics in the context of science, society, and health.

In fact, these topics are often considered “outside” from what the magazine should publish, as if science were neutral and had to be out of the political debate. But it is not! Even the most renowned scientific journals in the world assume positions on current and effervescent issues, as in this editorial in traditional The Lancet¹1. The Lancet. Gaza's crisis must not be overshadowed. Lancet 2006; 368:340.: Gaza’s Crisis Must Not Be Overshadowed, published in 2006. It also happens when the journals assume a clearly critical position presented in the form of declared support to electoral candidates that fight against denial of science and the dismantling of public policies and essential services for the population ²2. Why Nature needs to cover politics now more than ever. Nature 2020; 586:169-70.. Democracy is a central theme for the CSP, and we seek to speak up in critical moments of threats to democracy and the right to health ³3. Lima LD, Travassos C, Coeli CM, Carvalho MS. Democracia e Saúde Coletiva. Cad Saúde Pública 2016; 32:eED020416.^,44. Lima LD, Carvalho MS, Coeli CM. Sistema Único de Saúde: 30 anos de avanços e desafios. Cad Saúde Pública 2018; 34:e00117118..

Reflections on the journal evolution, published on its 10th, 15th, 20th, 25th, and 30th anniversaries, and the ones we provide now in this 40th issue, highlight a necessary discussion. After all, a journal does not survive only with the submission and publication of manuscripts, but also with choices and priorities for publication, defined by the editorial board according to the context.

In its launch editorial, the CSP stated its commitment, which has been the same since then: “...open to the collaboration of professionals from any national or foreign institutions, it proposes to be a permanent forum for debate on issues that are directly or indirectly linked with Public Health (...) thus participating in the dissemination and circulation of ideas that will contribute to improvements in education and research in this area” ⁵5. Sousa AFG. Editorial. Cad Saúde Pública 1985; 1:4. (p. 4). And so our journal continues. In 1992, in its early days, the goals defined for the journal established a path for this project, from indexing to the peer review process ⁶6. Coimbra Jr. CEA. Editorial. Cad Saúde Pública 1992; 8:3-4..

Among editorials focused on editorial policy, research integrity ⁷7. Vasconcelos SMR. The 4th World Conference on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Rewards: Improving Systems to Promote Responsible Research. Cad Saúde Pública 2015; 31:901-2. is a recurring topic, addressing issues about plagiarism ⁸8. Coimbra Jr. CEA. Plagiarismo em Ciência. Cad Saúde Pública 1996; 12:440-1.^,99. Carvalho MS, Travassos C, Coeli CM. Contra a cultura do corta & cola. Cad Saúde Pública 2014; 30:905-7. and authorship ¹⁰10. Coimbra Jr. CEA. O desafio da autoria. Cad Saúde Pública 1998; 14:668-9.^,1111. Pietrukowicz MCLC, Carvalho L, Ribeiro CK. A autoria científica em CSP. Cad Saúde Pública 2018; 34:e00174218., for example. With the initiative of the Editors’ Forum of the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz, acronym in Portuguese), in 2017, we became a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which aims to guide all actors involved in the publication process regarding ethical principles. The productivism required by scientist evaluation processes is directly related to issues of research integrity ¹²12. Coeli CM, Lima LD, Carvalho MS. Hipercompetitividade e integridade em pesquisa. Cad Saúde Pública 2018; 34:e00000718..

On the other hand, without ignoring their importance, the impact factors of journals clearly favor countries in the Global North ¹³13. Lemos AAB. E quem avalia os índices? Cad Saúde Pública 1997; 13:352-3.. The themes cited by equally indexed journals are not necessarily relevant in the Global South. The classification and ranking of journals in these indexers and their influence on the selection process of professors and on the evaluation of postgraduate programs was the subject of a collective editorial ¹⁴14. Cadernos de Saúde Pública; História, Ciências, Saúde - Manguinhos; Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz; Revista Eletrônica de Comunicação, Informação e Inovação em Saúde; Revista Fitos; Trabalho, Educação e Saúde, et al. Contribuições ao debate sobre a avaliação da produção científica no Brasil. Cad Saúde Pública 2019; 35:e00173219. involving seven journals from Fiocruz. CSP became a signatory of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) ¹⁵15. Carvalho MS, Travassos C, Coeli CM. Avaliação da produção científica em discussão. Cad Saúde Pública 2013; 29:1269-71., which indicates that less weight should be given to the journal classification based on these indicators. To support that, the CSP website does not highlight its impact factor.

More recent editorials have explained our priorities. Innovation, Quality and Quantity: Choose Two¹⁶16. Coeli CM, Carvalho MS, Lima LD. Inovação, qualidade e quantidade: escolha dois. Cad Saúde Pública 2016; 32:eED010116. and More of the Same Epidemiology?¹⁷17. Carvalho MS, Travassos C, Coeli CM. Mais do mesmo? Cad Saúde Pública 2013; 29:2141-3. summarize criteria for initial rejection of articles that are not selected for peer review: low relevance, little originality, and methodological inadequacy are the main reasons for such initial refusal. Guidelines for each CSP thematic subarea have been published in several editorials: epidemiological studies ¹⁸18. Werneck GL. Diagramas causais: a epidemiologia brasileira de volta para o futuro. Cad Saúde Pública 2016; 32:e00120416.^,1919. Coeli CM, Carvalho MS, Lima LD. A importância da pergunta de pesquisa na análise de dados epidemiológicos. Cad Saúde Pública 2021; 37:e00091921., literature reviews ²⁰20. Vidal EIO, Fukushima FB. A arte e a ciência de escrever um artigo científico de revisão. Cad Saúde Pública 2021; 37:e00063121., evaluation of health services ²¹21. Travassos C, Novaes HMD. Investigação e avaliação em serviços de saúde. Cad Saúde Pública 2004; 20 Suppl 2:S144-5., research in digital environments ²²22. Deslandes S, Coutinho T. Pesquisa social em ambientes digitais em tempos de COVID-19: notas teórico-metodológicas. Cad Saúde Pública 2020; 36:e00223120., websurveys ²³23. Coeli CM, Lima LD, Carvalho MS. Boas práticas na condução e relato de estudos baseados em websurveys. Cad Saúde Pública 2020; 36:e00169120., book reviews ²⁴24. Moreira MCN. Resenhas críticas: sobre livros, leituras e leitores críticos. Cad Saúde Pública 2021; 37:e00175921.. We also seek to make our job clear to authors and readers ²⁵25. Alves LC, Carvalho MS, Lima LD. Transparência e processo editorial: como é o trabalho das Editoras-chefes? Cad Saúde Pública 2022; 38:e00089822..

We can say that every topic, every event, every congress, every challenge in the field of Public Health has been addressed in an editorial at some point, as well as the directions of health policy, new (and old) diseases, inequalities, and inequities. The role of women in science and publishing is a frequent topic of our three Editors-in-Chief ²⁶26. Carvalho MS, Coeli CM, Lima LD. Mulheres no mundo da ciência e da publicação científica. Cad Saúde Pública 2018; 34:e00025018., but not new in the CSP: in the thematic issue published in 1991, the editorial said “to conclude, we highlight that (with two honorable exceptions) all authors included here are female authors” ²⁷27. Giffin KM. Mulher e saúde. Cad Saúde Pública 1991; 7:133-4. (p. 134). Open science is also an increasingly present topic ²⁸28. Carvalho MS, Travassos C, Coeli CM. Acesso livre. Cad Saúde Pública 2013; 29:213-5.^,2929. Carvalho MS. Aberto, por quê? Cad Saúde Pública 2015; 31:221-2., associated with the challenges for a gradually more collective scientific practice ³⁰30. Lima LD, Carvalho MS, Alves LC. Diálogos para uma prática científica mais coletiva. Cad Saúde Pública 2023; 39:e00236022..

Our initial intention in this editorial was to briefly highlight the CSP themes and positioning over these 40 years. But it was not possible to be brief. In these 40 years, the CSP editorials have reflected the most relevant topics studied, researched, and debated in the field. As we stated in another editorial: the CSP is a “common asset of Public Health” ³¹31. Carvalho MS, Coeli CM, Lima LD. CSP: bem comum da Saúde Coletiva. Cad Saúde Pública 2017; 33:e00133517.. In this sense, we seek to emphasize the contributions of the editorials, just like its equivalent in the press in general, which identify issues that permeate the different sections of the journal, expand the focus of the discussion, and reflect on our own role beyond the walls of academia.

References

Publication Dates

History