Motivations, challenges, and sustainability of paediatric cardiology journal editors

BACKGROUND: Journal editors play a central role in academic publishing. However, little is known about the experiences of editors within paediatric cardiology. This study aimed to explore the motivations, workload, peer review challenges, and sustainability of editorial roles in this specialty. METHODS: A cross-sectional, anonymous survey was conducted among paediatric cardiology journal editors and associate editors. Quantitative responses were analysed descriptively, and free-text responses underwent inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 28 editors participated. Most respondents (82.1%) identified education and mentorship as key motivations for editorial work. However, 78.6% reported that editorial roles are becoming increasingly difficult, and only 21.4% reported having sufficient protected time, highlighting substantial workload pressures. Reviewer fatigue was a major challenge, with 75.0% reporting difficulty securing timely, high-quality peer review. While 57.9% acknowledged that impact factor influences editorial considerations, 89.5% agreed that journals with lower impact factors remain highly valuable for education. Only 28.6% of respondents considered the current editorial model sustainable, with 46.4% expressing concern regarding long-term sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric cardiology journal editors demonstrate strong intrinsic motivation but face increasing workload, reviewer fatigue, and limited institutional support. These findings highlight a growing imbalance between editorial expectations and available support structures. Greater institutional recognition, provision of protected time, and pragmatic innovation in peer review processes may be required to sustain editorial engagement and maintain the educational and scientific mission of paediatric cardiology publishing.