The Past and the Future Are in the Present: The Continuing Evolution of AJIDD.

03Original abstract

The American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities—AJIDD—and its predecessors have been among the forefront of publication venues representing the vanguard of scientific thinking about intellectual and developmental disability (IDD). A cursory review from 50 years ago reveals an American Journal on Mental Deficiency table of contents across 1957-1958 rich in scientific and administrative issues of the era including mental health, education, social work, and psychology. On the occasion of The American Association on Mental Retardation (AAMR; now AAIDD) 125th year (2001), a review of American Journal on Mental Retardation table of contents reveals an equally rich mix of work ranging from the role of religion in the lives of families with a family member with developmental delays, to basic language research designed to understand intentional communication, to evaluating outcomes associated with staff training in community-based residences.In some sense, little has changed in that we in the scientific and service community continue our commitment to increase understanding that in turn can be used to improve outcomes and the lives of individuals with IDD. But, of course, in many ways change is constant and closer inspection of content from 50 years ago shows that active areas of serious inquiry included questioning why mothers might have difficulty in "giving up" their "Mongol" child for placement or that failure to consider early psychosocial-sexual attachment issues would lead to deviancy and disturbance. When I consider the different legacies of the scientific work in the area of IDD, its historical context viewed through contemporary lenses, I look for ideas which have evolved but stood the test of time. Those ideas that have stood the test of time have done so, in part, because of the scientific method—ever correcting. I think that is the strength (and the value) of the AJIDD legacy—its continuity provides a transparent and, at times, unsubtle as well as uncomfortable look at our past that helps point toward the future by relying on the cumulative nature of scientific activity and those engaged in it. In this sense, my primary goal and that of our editorial team are to be good scientific stewards.As we move fully into the first quarter of 21st century, the pace of change seems and feels relentlessly exponential—particularly in relation to information technologies and the dissemination of ideas (2017 was the 10-year anniversary of the iPhone; for many it is hard to imagine contemporary life without it, and, soon there will be a generation that have never known life without it). Careful scientific work is incremental often taking years to perform but can spread instantly and virtually through various social media and science media platforms. I know this firsthand as does our editorial team. Findings with relevance to a given syndrome or problem are instantly conveyed with parents and providers asking hard questions (as they should) and expecting quick answers when they learn of a new discovery "from the bench" or an outcome from a clinical trial—not in the course of months or weeks but based on a twitter update to their mobile device. I note the likely irony in writing this is that by the time of the next editorial transition, information technology will have continued its evolution (or revolution) and texts and tweets may well be regarded in the same way we look back on "dial up" and "facsimiles."Although there may be long-standing continuity in a given line of scientific inquiry, science, by its nature, is ever expanding as is, increasingly, the way we work and the way we share (i.e., disseminate) our work. The issue, in part, as I see it and in conversations with our editorial team, is how to position AJIDD to capture and reflect as much as possible the burgeoning IDD-relevant scientific activity that cuts across traditional disciplines (the so called cutting edge, think—big data, computational psychiatry, gene editing, personalized medicine, deep phenotyping, implementation science, etc.). To do so will require continuous evaluation, I believe, of several factors including conventional use metrics such as the analysis of subscription trends as it relates to AAIDD membership, tracking downloads, and other electronic use patterns. More important, I think, and perhaps with a note of irony that, in our technical information age, we need to (re)consider and (re)emphasize the social relationships among the scientists in the field of IDD and take intentional steps for creating contemporary publication opportunities and linkages for the next generation of scientific leaders in the IDD field. I would argue they are unlike any previous with respect to the options of how scientific activity is disseminated—I am probably the only and last member of my research group who relies on "paper" and still have journals stacked in my office. How are the myriad labs, research groups, and the like connected? What role can AJIDD (along with AAIDD) play in fostering connections? Who is "linked in"? Who is attending what conferences? What podcasts and twitter feeds are being used by junior scientists? Is AJIDD "virtually tied into" IDD relevant conferences (it used to print abstracts and full speeches from annual American Association on Mental Deficiency conferences including Presidential Addresses)? What is the value of the Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research Center network of National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's supported centers and how is AJIDD considered among center leadership, scientists, and trainees? Similarly, what is AJIDD's relation to the Association of University Centers on Disabilities umbrella and the national network of University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities? Considering such relations and interconnections, I think, is astrategic imperative to keep AJIDD as the primary outlet documenting today's IDD discoveries leading to tomorrow's IDD breakthroughs.And what of discovery and knowledge transfer? As a new editorial lead with a new editorial team, we are committed to the highest quality scientific research specific to IDD reflecting innovative ideas, approaches, and applications that are occurring right now. We are interested in new approaches to old problems. We are interested in new areas of inquiry with relevance to improving our understanding of the causes, consequences, and treatments for individuals living with IDD and their associated conditions. We are interested in new ideas about the "way things work" that can help "connect the dots" across seemingly disparate observations. We are interested in leveraging mechanistic thinking to unlock and increase the reach of pilot trials of novel interventions or confirmatory trials of established treatments. We are interested in cutting across disciplines and borders in our quest for new knowledge. We are interested in reviews—topical, critical, and quantitative—that shed light on the scientific and practice edges defining the knowledge frontiers. Such reviews show us where we have been and, in turn, can show us where we need to go. We are interested in developmental and lifespan approaches designed to elucidate developmental mechanisms that inform the developmental origins of the problems faced by individuals living with IDD and their families. We are interested in methodological inquiry addressing problems of measurement and outcome variables, sample heterogeneity, small sample sizes, nested dependencies, sample formation, group matching, and integration across levels of analysis. We are interested in technology development and innovation to accelerate the growth of the evidence base and foster further development of evidence-based trials that change policy and practice in IDD. In short, we are interested in featuring the present—the here and the now of the scientific activity and the problems that individuals and their labs and research groups and team are addressing and solving—and, by doing so, we will continue linking the past with the future.In preparing this inaugural editorial essay, I happily spent time re-reading and reflecting on what Dr. Deborah Fidler wrote in her opening editorial. Several points are worth making. First, Dr. Fidler and her editorial team moved the dial on AJIDD— the nature of the scientific work appearing over the last 4 years increased in breadth while continuing to exemplify strong methodological rigor. Second, the commitment to special issues and sections to organize cutting-edge thinking and findings provided a compelling forum highlighting productivity by many disciplinary and interdisciplinary research groups. It is a feature I intend to continue. Third, the cross cutting translational work with more frequent appearances of work on trials and outcomes as well as innovative intervention approaches has helped to move us into contemporary conversations about knowledge transfer and the impact of our field's work. For these reasons and several more, we as a field are indebted to Dr. Fidler and her editorial team and their service. On a personal note, I owe Dr. Fidler, as well as a number of hers and now my editorial predecessors including Dr. Len Abedduto and Dr. William (Bill) MacLean a debt of gratitude for their sage advice and endless patience with me as I step into the editorial role. It is indeed an honor.Frank J. Symons, University of Minnesota

American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2019 · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-124.1.1