-
B – A survey on predatory publications25 September 2017Moher D, Shamseer L, Cobey K, et al. Stop this waste of people, animals and money. Nature 2017;549:23-25 Predatory journals have shoddy reporting and include papers from wealthy nations. The authors selected and examined 200 supposed biomedical predatory journals. Most of the articles came from India, and more than half of the corresponding authors hailed from […]
-
B – Improving transparency at meetings25 September 2017Silberberg SD, Crawford DC, Finkelstein R, et al. Shake up conferences. Nature 2017;548:153-154 The role of scientific conferences, where much work gets its first airing, is crucial for communication. Hence greater transparency should be encouraged and embraced by all attendees.Earlier this year, the group of authors of this article met to hash out what could be […]
-
B – Science journalism25 September 2017N. Pitrelli. Science journalism: in search of a new identity. Medical Writing 2017;26(2) Science journalism is undergoing a major transition due to changes in the relationship between science and society and dissemination via digital and connective technologies. This article presents a number of scenarios and a series of significant results of research that fuel the […]
-
B – Tackling wordiness in medicine and science25 September 2017 B. Every. Writing economically in medicine and science: tips for tackling wordiness. Medical Writing 2017;26(1) In this article, the author describes three ways for medical writers and editors to tackle wordiness: avoiding repetition, eliminating redundancy, and minimising purposeless words such as unnecessary qualifiers, weak verbs, and roundabout expressions. An added benefit of limiting word clutter is […]
-
New Style Author Toolkit!24 September 2017Hot on the heels of the Peer Reviewer toolkit, comes a revised Author Toolkit! In the same style as the PR Toolkit, I have organised all the resources in the toolkit into some main themes and collected them together in different pages. The main themes of the modules are: General Writing Tips Peer Review for […]
-
New Style Author Toolkit!24 September 2017Hot on the heels of the Peer Reviewer toolkit, comes a revised Author Toolkit! In the same style as the PR Toolkit, I have organised all the resources in the toolkit into some main themes and collected them together in different pages. The main themes of the modules are: General Writing Tips Peer Review for […]
-
B – Scholarly publishing like a bubble21 September 2017Bariç H, Baždariç K, Glasnoviç A, et al. Why scholarly publishing might be a bubble. Croatian Medical Journal 2017;58(1):1-3(doi: 10.3325/cmj.2017.58.1) Scholarly publishing is expanding in all directions, like a bubble. The economy of publishing has many peculiarities: the number of publications, journals, and publishers is constantly on the rise; journals subscription prices have been growing […]
-
B – What is PubMed now?21 September 2017Anderson K. A confusion of journals – what is PubMed now? The Scholarly Kitchen September 7, 2017 PubMed Central used to be a credentialing system, an online port of the MEDLINE index. This shift of medium quickly made it a search engine, but one built on a manual and highly curated index. Then it was discovered […]
-
B – Manuscript submission systems21 September 2017Hartley J, Cabanac G. The delights, discomforts, and downright furies of the manuscript submission process. Learned Publishing 2017;30(2):167-172(doi: 10.1002/leap.1092)The authors described the frustrations that many authors feel when using manuscript submission systems. Undoubtedly these new systems have many benefits, such as the ability to detect plagiarism and fake articles and to speed up the production process. […]
-
B – Senior scientists victim of predatory journals21 September 2017Cobey K. Illegitimate journals scam even senior scientists. Nature September 7, 2017;549:7 The author has seen a litany of researchers preyed on by predatory journals, even those who recognize a potential problem can fall victim. She has ideas on how to stop it: better job of educating trainees and faculty members about how to assess a […]
-
B – Core competencies for scientific editors21 September 2017Moher D, Galipeau J, Alam S, et al. Core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals: consensus statement. BMC Medicine 2017;15:167(doi: 10.1186/s12916-017-0927-0) The authors describe the development of a minimum set of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals. The 14 key core competencies are divided into three major areas, and each competency has […]
-
PubMed Journal Selection Webinar14 September 2017Join staff of the U.S. National Library of Medicine to learn how journals are selected for MEDLINE and PubMed Central, how NLM has responded to an evolving scholarly communication ecosystem, and how to use NLM resources in assessing the quality of a publication. “PubMed Journal Selection and the Changing Landscape of Scholarly Communication.” Date and […]
