-
B – Technology and discipline13 June 2013Editorial. Disciplinary action. How scientists share and reuse information is driven by technology but shaped by discipline. Nature 495:409-410(doi: 10.1038/495409b) Scientists don’t hold consistent views about how widely information should be shared and reused. Today, diversity of experiences and attitudes on the open sharing stand out across the disciplines. New technologies can allow a much […]
-
B – The determinants of open access publishing13 June 2013Eger T, Scheufen M, Meierrieks D. The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from Germany. Social Science Research Network March 13, 2013(doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2232675) Results of a 2012 survey showed significant differences between the scientific disciplines with respect to researcher’s awareness of and experience with both open access journals and self-archiving. Results also suggested that the […]
-
B – The structured abstracts11 June 2013Bauchner H, Henry R, Golub RM. The restructuring of structured abstracts. Adding a table in the Results section. JAMA 2013;309(5):491-492(doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.76) Today all medical journals virtually use structured abstracts for articles reporting the results of research papers, although the sections and subheadings vary in journals. In this issue of JAMA the next generation of structured […]
-
B – Editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines11 June 2013Hopewell S, Ravaud P, Baron G, et al. Effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 2012;344:e4178(doi:10.1136/bmj.e4178)This article aims at investigating the effect of the publication of the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines, and the effect of different journals’ editorial policies to implement […]
-
B – Traditional and open access publishing in oncology11 June 2013Poltronieri E, Bravo E, Camerini T, et al. Where on earth to publish? a sample survey comparing traditional and open access publishing in the oncological field. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research 2013;32(4)(doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-32-4) This article intends to help scientific authors to make the best choice of journals in which to publish, by describing […]
-
B – Open vs blinded peer review5 June 2013Vinther S, Nielsen OH, Rosenberg J, et al. Same review quality in open versus blinded peer review in “Ugeskrift for Laeger”. Danish Medical Journal 2012;59(8):A4479 The aim of this study was to compare the quality of reviews produced by identifiable and anonymous reviewers working for the Journal of the Danish Medical Association (Ugeskrift for Laeger-Ufl), […]
-
B – Editing in the digital world – Conference5 June 2013Masic I. “Editing in the digital world” – Scientific conference about medical editing and publishing, Tallinn June 08-10.2012. Acta Informatica Medica 2012;20(3):198-199(doi: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.198-199) The scientific conference “Editing in the digital world” (Tallinn, June 8-10, 2012) was also dedicated to the celebration of the 30th EASE anniversary. The article describes the interesting scientific part of the conference, that […]
-
B – Digital licenses replace print prices5 June 2013Gantz P. Digital licenses replace print prices as accurate reflection of real journal costs. Professional/Scholarly Publishing Bulletin 2012;11(3):1-5 Library Journal‘s Annual Periodical Price Survey 1990-2010 showed a more than six-fold increase in journal prices since 1990. Institutional libraries have shifted their purchasing patterns from print to digital holdings, and are pursuing licensing agreements that provide perpetual […]
-
B – Copy-editing of research papers5 June 2013Joshi Y. Copy-editing of research papers: who and why and why not. Current Science 2013;104(2):171 This commentary explores the “who and why” of copy-editing. The need for copy-editing to ensure the quality of research papers and the importance of hiring an editor with language and subject expertise are evinced. According to the author, it is […]
-
B – Medical writer education5 June 2013Benau D. On educating the medical writer. Medical Writing 2013;22(1):26-28(doi: 10.1179/2047480612Z.00000000081) Most medical writers received their education on the job rather than through formal education. However, formal education gives a more uniform foundation of knowledge than experience alone. This article addresses some of the differences between education and training, educational approaches and delivery methods, and potential […]
-
B – The San Francisco Declaration on research assessment29 May 2013Yandell K. Scientists take aim at impact factor. The Scientist Magazine May 20, 2013 Many organizations involved in scientific publishing have up to now signed a declaration, called the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), that asks the scientific community (scientists, funding bodies, and others) to put less weight on impact factor. It argues that, within […]
-
B – Teaching scientific writing29 May 2013Heseltine E. Teaching scientific writing to non-native English speakers. Medical Writing 2013;22(1):13-15(doi: 10.1179/204748012X13560931063591) The author describes the basic design of a 3-day workshop on scientific writing for non-native English speakers. It is designed to give participants a basic understanding of writing scientific articles for international journals, and does not include English-language teaching. Scientific communication could […]
