JAE, 2022: Report of the Editor‐in‐Chief

Submissions to the Journal have stabilised since the Covid‐related surge in 2020, and continue their strong international pattern. Our response times continue to meet or exceed our targets, with a few regrettable exceptions, for which our sincere apologies. The JAE's citation impact factor increased again in 2021 to 4.16, a modest increase from the 2020 score. Our total 2‐year citations, however, show a worrying decline since last year. Our sincere thanks are due to our authors and our many reviewers for their contributions. Wiley continue to provide a strong publishing platform with our full archive, generating continuing growth in downloads.

Antibiotic review kit for hospitals (ARK-Hospital): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to reduce antibiotic overuse in hospitals depend on prescribers taking decisions to stop unnecessary antibiotic use. There is scarce evidence for how to support these decisions. We evaluated a multifaceted behaviour change intervention (ie, the antibiotic review kit) designed to reduce antibiotic use among adult acute general medical inpatients by increasing appropriate decisions to stop antibiotics at clinical review. METHODS: We performed a stepped-wedge, cluster (hospital)-randomised controlled trial using computer-generated sequence randomisation of eligible hospitals in seven calendar-time blocks in the UK. Hospitals were eligible for inclusion if they admitted adult non-elective general or medical inpatients, had a local representative to champion the intervention, and could provide the required study data. Hospital clusters were randomised to an implementation date occurring at 1-2 week intervals, and the date was concealed until 12 weeks before implementation, when local preparations were designed to start. The intervention effect was assessed using data from pseudonymised routine electronic health records, ward-level antibiotic dispensing, Clostridioides difficile tests, prescription audits, and an implementation process evaluation. Co-primary outcomes were monthly antibiotic defined daily doses per adult acute general medical admission (hospital-level, superiority) and all-cause mortality within 30 days of admission (patient level, non-inferiority margin of 5%). Outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (ie, excluding sites that withdrew before implementation). Intervention effects were assessed by use of interrupted time series analyses within each site, estimating overall effects through random-effects meta-analysis, with heterogeneity across prespecified potential modifiers assessed by use of meta-regression. This trial is completed and is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN12674243. FINDINGS: 58 hospital organisations expressed an interest in participating. Three pilot sites implemented the intervention between Sept 25 and Nov 20, 2017. 43 further sites were randomised to implement the intervention between Feb 12, 2018, and July 1, 2019, and seven sites withdrew before implementation. 39 sites were followed up for at least 14 months. Adjusted estimates showed reductions in total antibiotic defined daily doses per acute general medical admission (-4·8% per year, 95% CI -9·1 to -0·2) following the intervention. Among 7 160 421 acute general medical admissions, the ARK intervention was associated with an immediate change of -2·7% (95% CI -5·7 to 0·3) and sustained change of 3·0% (-0·1 to 6·2) in adjusted 30-day mortality. INTERPRETATION: The antibiotic review kit intervention resulted in sustained reductions in antibiotic use among adult acute general medical inpatients. The weak, inconsistent intervention effects on mortality are probably explained by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals should use the antibiotic review kit to reduce antibiotic overuse. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Implementation of a Nationwide Knowledge-Based COVID-19 Contact Tracing Training Program, 2020.

In the United States, the public health response to control COVID-19 required rapid expansion of the contact tracing workforce from approximately 2200 personnel prepandemic to more than 100 000 during the pandemic. We describe the development and implementation of a free nationwide training course for COVID-19 contact tracers that launched April 28, 2020, and summarize participant characteristics and evaluation findings through December 31, 2020. Uptake of the online asynchronous training was substantial: 90 643 registrants completed the course during the first 8 months. In an analysis of a subset of course participants (n = 13 697), 7724 (56.4%) reported having no prepandemic public health experience and 7178 (52.4%) reported currently serving as case investigators, contact tracers, or both. Most participants who completed a course evaluation reported satisfaction with course utility (94.8%; 59 497 of 62 753) and improved understanding of contact tracing practice (93.0%; 66 107 of 71 048). These findings suggest that the course successfully reached the intended audience of new public health practitioners. Lessons learned from this implementation indicate that an introductory course level is appropriate for a national knowledge-based training that aims to complement jurisdiction-specific training. In addition, offering a range of implementation options can promote course uptake among public health agency staff. This course supported the emerging needs of the public health practice community by training a workforce to fill an important gap during the COVID-19 pandemic and could serve as a feasible model for enhancing workforce knowledge for future and ongoing public health threats.

JAE, 2021: Report of the Editor‐in‐Chief

Submissions to the journal have decreased since the Covid‐related surge in 2020, but continue their strong international pattern. Our response times continue to meet or exceed our targets, with a few regrettable exceptions, for which our sincere apologies. The JAE's citation impact factor increased again in 2020 to 3.58, though the calculation now includes early view papers, so is not directly comparable with previous years. Our total 2‐year citations continue a strong upward trend. Our sincere thanks are due to our authors and our many reviewers for this performance. Wiley continue to provide a strong publishing platform with our full archive, generating continuing growth in downloads. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Agricultural Economics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Journal submissions, review and editorial decision patterns during initial COVID-19 restrictions.

We use the full administrative records from four leading agricultural economics journals to study the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on manuscript submission, editorial desk rejection and reviewer acceptance rates, and time to editorial decision. We also test for gender differences in these impacts. Manuscript submissions increased sharply and equi-proportionately by gender. Desk rejection rates remained stable, leading to increased demand for reviews. Female reviewers became eight percentage points more likely to decline a review invitation during the early stage of the pandemic. First editorial decisions for papers sent out for peer review occurred significantly faster after pandemic lockdowns began. Overall, the initial effects of the pandemic on journal editorial tasks and review patterns appear relatively modest, despite the increased number of submissions handled by editors and reviewers. We find no evidence in agricultural economics of a generalized disruption to near-term, peer-reviewed publication.

Burlingame, Katherine. 2020. Dead Landscapes – and How to Make Them Live

Burlingame, Katherine. With respect to the intellectual engagement, Burlingame has pointed to the importance of phenomenological perspectives in our apprehension of landscape. It is absolutely right that a thesis of this nature should seek to make interventions and I am sure that many heritage managers would find Burlingame's reflections and formal recommendations highly instructive. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Norwegian Journal of Geography is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)