Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Riis

Publications and source records attributed to P Riis.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1995

[Referees--science's watchdogs and authors best friends].

External reviewers play an important part as guardians of scientific standards and advisers to the editors of professional journals. A study of 156 reviewers in the Nordic countries showed that they make a great contribution, but differ widely from each other in their assessments of the same papers. Experienced reviewers and young referees were found to be the most critical. A trial of an evaluation check list showed that most reviewers appreciated its help.

Periodicals as Topic↗
PubMed1994

Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts. Effects of referee characteristics and publication language.

OBJECTIVE: To study the association between referee characteristics and their manuscript assessments, the influence of manuscript language on referees' judgments, and the usefulness, quality, and extent of referees' free-text comments. DESIGN: Two nonauthentic, but realistic, short manuscripts with a number of common methodological flaws were sent to 180 Scandinavian referees. Through randomization, each referee received one of the manuscripts in English and the other manuscript in the national language. A structured assessment of the manuscript quality was expressed on a 5-point scale, and the impact of referee characteristics (age, gender, experience, and so on) was analyzed by multiple linear regression. MAIN OUTCOME: Manuscript quality assessed by referees. RESULTS: A total of 312 reviews from 156 referees could be used for the study of referee characteristics and language. With increasing experience, the referees gave lower quality scores (P < .05). A tendency toward stricter assessment with younger age was seen (P < .05). No influence of referees' gender, specialty, or nationality was found. For the test manuscript of the poorest quality, the English version was assessed to be better than the national-language version (P < .05). A total of 159 of 312 reviews included free-text comments applicable for the methodological study. In 54 reviews (34%), no methodological comments accompanied the assessment, and in six reviews they were only incomplete. Wrong sampling unit was mentioned by one fourth of 80 referees. Only one referee mentioned the incorrect use of a parametric test in the analysis of data whose distribution was nonparametric. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced and young referees gave a stricter assessment of the manuscripts than their less experienced and older colleagues. An English version seemed to be accepted more easily than a national-language version of the same manuscript. Most referees spontaneously mentioned the shortcomings of the manuscripts only as part of their overall judgment.

Humans↗
PubMed1993

Medical ethics in the European Community.

Increasing European co-operation must take place in many areas, including medical ethics. Against the background of common cultural norms and pluralistic variation within political traditions, religion and lifestyles, Europe will have to converge towards unity within the field of medical ethics. This article examines how such convergence might develop with respect to four major areas: European research ethics committees, democratic health systems, the human genome project and rules for stopping futile treatments.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1993

Scientific dishonesty and good scientific practice.

Scientific dishonesty has been the subject of much public interest in recent years. Although the problem has had a low profile in Denmark, there is no reason to believe that it is non-existent. Several preconditions known to be important prevail here as well as in other countries, such as pressure to publish and severe competition for research grants and senior academic positions. The Danish Medical Research Council (DMRC) decided to respond to this problem by preparing a report on scientific dishonesty with suggestions to the research institutions on rules for good scientific practice and procedures for investigation of suspected dishonesty. To this end, an investigatory system was suggested. The system should consist of two regional committees and one national committee. They should be headed by high court judges and experienced health sciences researchers as members. The committees will investigate cases reported to them and conclude on whether dishonesty has been established and on whether the scientific work should be retracted. Sanctions shall remain the task of the institutions. Preventive measures comprise open access to and a long storage period for scientific data.

Denmark↗
PubMed1992

Extension of indications of immunosuppression in inflammatory bowel disease.

Treatment of the two chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) is still hampered, because we do not understand the pathophysiological processes behind them. Are they caused by a normal inflammatory response reacting towards a foreign agent, or are they caused by an abnormal inflammatory response against a common or even universal agent? Our only choices at present are symptomatic treatments, including immunosuppressive drugs. To make the necessary controlled testing of new immunosuppressive drugs ethically acceptable, we have to choose carefully between different designs: comparing a new drug against placebo in overall treatment failures, to add the new drug or placebo to ongoing treatment (addition design), or to apply a classical group comparison between test drug and placebo in moderately active cases. There exists a strong need for extension of indications for immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory treatments: to be able to treat long-term instead of short-term, to do without extensive surgery in some UC cases, to treat severe UC cases with isolated distal involvement, to treat CD patients with short bowel syndrome, and to treat CD patients with fistulae and severe extra-intestinal manifestations. Future drug treatment of IBD will probably still be based on immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory drugs, while waiting for a pathophysiological breakthrough in these two diseases.

Colitis, Ulcerative↗