-
B – Gender bias in medical publication22 July 2010Heckenberg A, Druml C. Gender aspects in medical publication – the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 2010;122:141-145. Worldwide, about 50% of students starting medical school are female but a […]
-
B – Public perception of clinical trials22 July 2010Ohman EM, Roe MT, Armstrong PW, et al. Public sensationalism and clinical trials: how to address the challenges of science? American Journal of Medicine 2010;123:481-483. http://www.amjmed.com/article/PIIS0002934309011504/fulltext Ensuring that clinical trials […]
-
B – Changing ethos of medical publications22 July 2010Kojima T, Barron JP. Changes in the ethos of medical publications as reflected in progressive alterations in the uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals (1979-2008). Chest 2010;137:1479-1482. doi […]
-
N – Steering a middle course22 July 2010A new journal, Hypotheses in the Life Sciences, will publish papers that introduce new ideas in biology that “advance or challenge scientific thinking”. The papers will be chosen primarily with […]
-
B – Publication bias in stroke studies20 July 2010Sena1 ES, van der Worp HB, Bath PM, et al. Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy. PLoS Biology 2010;8:e1000344. http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000344 The existence […]
-
N – New group tackles European copyright15 July 2010The European Network for Copyright in Support of Education and Science (ENCES) has been set up to lobby for changes in European copyright law in support of education and science. […]
-
N – Scandinavian open access initiatives14 July 2010Three Scandinavian institutions have recently proposed open access (OA) policies. Sweden’s Royal Library (Kungliga biblioteket, KB) promises to provide immediate open access to digital versions of all material by KB […]
-
N – PLoS ignores impact factors14 July 2010The Public Library of Science (PLoS) has decided “to stop promoting journal impact factors on our sites altogether. It’s time to move on, and focus efforts on more sophisticated, flexible […]
-
B – Assessing sincerity of misconduct apologies14 July 2010Souder L. A rhetorical analysis of apologies for scientific misconduct: do they really mean it? Science and Engineering Ethics 2010;16:175-184. http://www.springerlink.com/content/695602346198p00j Published acknowledgements of scientific misconduct can be sincere or […]
-
B – Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias?8 July 2010Fanelli D. Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS One 2010; 5(4): e10271(doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010271) The growing competition culture in academia might conflict […]
-
B – Bridging the divide between science and journalism8 July 2010Van Eperen L, Marincola FM, Strohm J. Bridging the divide between science and journalism. Journal of Translational Medicine 2010;8:25(doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-8-25) It is important for scientists and journalists to bridge the […]
-
B – Health research reporting guidelines8 July 2010Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I et al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLos Med. 2010 February; 7(2):e1000217(doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217) The authors of this article believe that nowadays […]