10 years of Facts Views & Vision in Obgyn: Chief editor's report.

Submissions: Out of 582 submissions, 310 papers were published, not taking into account the 40 editorials, 6 “A tribute to” papers and 12 “History of Medicine” contributions. Table I gives an overview of the different nature of the publications. The acceptance rate turned out to be 53.2 %. list of different papers published in “Facts Views & Vision in ObGyn (period: 2009-2018) It was our aim from the beginning to give a forum to “Views and Vision” papers. More than 20% of our publications (66/310) were “Opinion and Viewpoint” papers, and this shows exactly what we were standing for. Although PhD-summaries and Who’s Who papers don’t contribute to a reasonable Impact Factor, we are proud and happy to have published them. In Table II we report the most cited FV&V publications in the period 2009-2017. We were positively surprised about the impact of our papers. I believe that we have proven that even without being supported by a major scientific society and without substantial funding it is possible not only to survive, but also to have considerable impact on the actual scientific literature of obstetrics, gynaecology and reproductive health. 25 most frequent cited papers (period: 2009-2017) From 2019 on, our Journal will be owned by the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) in cooporation with the Walking Egg non-profit organization. It will become the official Journal of the ESGE, this means that the major part of the papers will present the surgical aspects of endoscopic imaging and allied techniques. Another part of the Journal will still publish selected papers as we did before. We have completed 10 exciting years. On behalf of the editorial board and the publisher of “Facts Views Vis ObGyn”. I would like to thank all the authors and referees who contributed to the journal since 2009. It was an honour and a pleasure to be part of this exciting project. A bright and interesting future is waiting for us. We still count on our referees and our artistic reviewer, Koen Vanmechelen, who is responsible for the very attractive look of our journal. The confrontation of art and science will be continued. I look forward to a promising future.