WE DON’T PRACTICE IN THE SAME WAY WE DID 25 YEARS ago. Then, we did a lot of things because that was the way we always did them, or because the unit policy said we must, or because someone just came back from a conference and that’s how they were doing it down there (up there, over there…). Today we implement practice changes based on a review of the existing evidence, based on the results of a meta-analysis, or as a result of multicentered benchmarking work.

THE BUSINESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A JOURNAL THAT is relevant, interesting, and scholarly has become increasingly more challenging and complex. Pressure from funding agencies to make government-sponsored research results freely accessible, the increasing movement towards online access to articles, and a general need to attend to the bottom line in a shrinking market for print journals, has resulted in two troubling events that I would like to share with you. The details of the first, the severing of ties between the American Journal of Nursing (AJN) and the American Nurses Association (ANA), are outlined in the accompanying letter that was sent to ANA by members of the International Association of Nurse Editors. In the second case, the editor-in-chief and the senior deputy editor of the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), the journal of the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) were fired in February of this year. The reason for the firing—editorial freedom. The editors of the CMAJ commissioned a story on women’s experiences in obtaining the morning-after pill from pharmacies in Canada. When the Canadian Pharmacists Association heard about the story, they complained to the publisher of CMAJ who asked the editors to withhold the story.¹ The editors chose to publish a negotiated revision but were fired for irreconcilable differences.²

IN THE PAST TWO ISSUES OF Neonatal Network:® The Journal of Neonatal Nursing, the editorials have focused on the move toward basing nursing practice on available evidence (evidence-based practice) and how that might translate to the articles that are published in Neonatal Network.® While I have given my assurances that the fundamental mission and style of the journal have not changed, I have suggested that we are moving towards a higher standard from our authors, our reviewers and ultimately you as our reader. In reality, we are all being asked to practice to a higher standard by the most important stakeholders here—our patients. Clearly, basing our practice on the best available evidence is about providing the best possible level of care for our patients.

SOMO PEOPLE MARK THE BEGINNING OF A NEW YEAR in September when the kids (or the academics) go back to school. Others look at the calendar and celebrate the New Year as the ball drops in Times Square. Still others use different calendars to mark the passage of time. Regardless of when the year starts for you, the mid-winter break is a good time to take stock of where you are, both personally and professionally. As you prepare to unfold the calendar for 2007 you might pause to think about where your practice will take you in the next year. Whoever said “life is a journey, not a destination” was certainly right when it comes to nursing practice. To make the most of the journey, we need to be open to new experiences and opportunities. You never know what door might open when you choose to turn a key. I am not one to make New Year’s resolutions, but I am promising to try to live by this motto, especially as I set off on a six month sabbatical from my day job at the University where I teach. It is my plan to take the time to think about the journey that is my neonatal practice and to explore some new roads along the way.

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE (EBM) HAS BEEN DEFINED as “the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.”¹

THIS TITLE EITHER HARKENS BACK TO YOUR favorite Disney ride or makes you want to close the journal right now. What brings me to write under such a corny banner? Well, it started when my 15-year-old was telling me about the philanthropy committee she sits on at school and the report she was writing outlining which charities she thought the school’s fundraising should support. This followed hot on the heels of a story in the local paper about a high school that had worked for four years to build a school in Africa. All this led me to think about philanthropy in nursing and what our role might be in the global village.

Editor’s Note: This information is excerpted from the chapter, “Intrauterine Infections,” in the new book: Infection in the Neonate: A Comprehensive Guide to Assessment, Management, and Nursing Care. Ordering information can be found on the facing page, or you may order online at: www.neonatalnetwork.com/nicuink.

“I’D LIKE TO WRITE AN ARTICLE, BUT I DON’T KNOW where to start.” This is a common theme in e-mails I get from prospective authors. Fair enough; the process of getting an article from conception to publication can appear daunting. This is one of the reasons that Neonatal Network® is committed to working with new authors, helping translate their curiosity and expertise into solid, practical articles that can benefit neonatal nurses. This is balanced by articles from seasoned researchers and authors who also choose Neonatal Network® as a vehicle for disseminating new knowledge and ensuring that this knowledge is available to the practice community.

RUNNING A MARATHON IS ALL ABOUT PUSHING THE human body farther than its meant to go: Beyond the point where glycogen is available, beyond the point where muscles cease complaining and just plain cramp up. Doing a Google search on “pushing yourself” yields all kinds of references to running, training, triathlons, just about any type of physical training imaginable.

MANY OF YOU ATTENDING THIS MEETING, SOME FOR the first time, will be reading this editorial at the National Neonatal Nurses Meeting in Chicago. You might wonder, as I used to, how this meeting gets put together. Why Chicago and not your hometown? Why some of the same old speakers, or, why not more of the big names?