Readership Survey Results
In May 2021, Wolters Kluwer, ACDS and the editorial office of Dermatitis jointly developed a readership survey to obtain feedback from the membership about our journal, Dermatitis. This survey was conducted online through SurveyMonkey. Over 2,000 emailed invitations were sent out, and the survey response rate was approximately 10%. This low response rate is typical for such surveys.
Here is What We Learned:
The respondents were mostly dermatologists, with some fellows/residents in training; allergists also responded. There was a diverse mix of ages, with more than half being under the age of 45. The majority held memberships in ACDS as well as AAD.
Major Results of the Survey:
- The majority (75%) of respondents preferred the print version of the Journal, with younger readers more likely to prefer a desktop or laptop computer to access Journal content.
- Readers gave positive feedback across many attributes of the journal, with two-thirds regarding its currency of content (67%) and usefulness to their profession (65%) as excellent.
- Readers were mixed when comparing the Journal’s quality to other dermatology publications, but less than a third said it was worse than Contact Dermatitis (41% said Dermatitis is better and 48% said it is about the same).
- Most readers did not find the social media content to be useful.
- The readers were very interested in Continuing Medical Education credit for the self-assessment quiz.
- There was interest in an image gallery to be posted on the Dermatitis website.
- The readers were interested in expanding the scope of the Journal beyond the current four major subjects of Contact, Atopic, Occupational and Drug induced dermatitis to additional topics, such as environmental allergy.
Editor’s Response to the Survey:
I am grateful to those who provided this important feedback to the Journal. We are using this information to gauge the interest for installing new features for the Journal, such as Images in Dermatitis, CME for the self-assessment quiz and potentially expanding the scope of Dermatitis to include environmental dermatitis. We will also carefully evaluate our social media platform to better complement our print and online journal and bring more attention to Dermatitis. All of the feedback provided by this survey will be the subject of intense discussion with ACDS, our advisory board and publisher.
For those who did not respond to the survey, I want to make it clear that the editorial office is always available to listen to your feedback, positive or negative. We welcome it, so please contact me with your thoughts about the questions raised by this survey or any other Journal-related business (firstname.lastname@example.org).
When it comes to improving the quality of Dermatitis, our work is never finished!
Anthony A. Gaspari, MD