SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In the 13 years since it was first published the "Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals" (the Vancouver style), developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, has been widely accepted by both authors and editors; over 400 journals have stated that they will consider manuscripts that conform to its requirements. This is the fourth edition of the "Uniform requirements."
In the 12 years since it was first published, the "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals" (the Vancouver style), developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, has been widely accepted by both authors and editors; more than 400 journals have stated that they will consider manuscripts that conform to its requirements. This is the fourth edition of the Uniform Requirements.
These statements, which are published by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in conjunction with the Vancouver standards, cover some of the legal, ethical, and practical aspects of the publication of research papers, and of the comments generated by them, in biomedical journals. Following a definition of what constitutes a peer-reviewed journal, the roles of journal owners and editors are described, along with those of members of an editorial board, and procedural norms are set forth in connection with conflicts of interests, retractions or corrections, fraud, and breaches of confidentiality. Among the last topics explored are the problems involved in the dissemination of research results by the popular media, the handling of advertising within the journal, and the simultaneous acceptance of manuscripts whose authors have arrived at opposite conclusions regarding the results of a particular study.
Altruistic motives and trust are central to scientific investigations involving people. These prompt volunteers to participate in clinical trials. However, publication bias and other causes of the failure to report trial results may lead to an overly positive view of medical interventions in the published evidence available. Registration of randomised controlled trials right from the start is therefore warranted. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has issued a statement to the effect that the 11 journals represented in the Committee will not consider publication of the results of trials that have not been registered in a publicly accessible register such as www.clinicaltrials.gov. Patients who voluntarily participate in clinical trials need to know that their contribution to better human healthcare is available for decision making in clinical practice.
PURPOSE: To determine the number of researchers who fulfill the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria and to evaluate individual contributions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The author contribution lists of Radiology articles published between 1998 and 2000 with at least three authors were reviewed. The fulfillment of ICMJE criteria for authorship and the contribution percentage were assessed according to each researcher's position in the byline and nationality (American vs international), number of researchers per article, and year of publication. RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent of researchers fulfilled the ICMJE authorship criteria. Position in the byline indicated a significant difference in fulfillment (P <.001): 98.9% and 85.3% for the first and second authors, respectively, and 52.8% and 66.5% for the middle and last authors, respectively. American researchers had a higher percentage (78%) of fulfillment than did international researchers (57%) (P <.001). Fulfillment decreased as the number of authors per article increased (P <.001), although there was no significant change throughout 1998-2000. The mean contribution percentages decreased greatly from first to second to last to middle authors. American researchers had a significantly larger mean contribution percentage than did international researchers. Of the total 6,686 researchers, 2,316 (35%) contributed to one or two categories. This rate was higher for middle and international authors. CONCLUSION: The 68% fulfillment of criteria for authorship was closely related to the large number of researchers contributing to one category or to categories belonging to the same ICMJE criterion.
In the absence of a systematic monitoring program for drugs newly approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), reports in clinical journals provide a legitimate forum for disseminating information about unexpected pharmacologic events. A journal editor bears the responsibility for publishing educated clinical observations that meet standards of scientific rigor while not giving premature credibility to chance and dubious reports of side effects of new drugs. Often this responsibility involves overcoming the fear of bad publicity and withstanding pressures from pharmaceutical companies to print only positive information about new products. Published preliminary observations may contribute to the problem of product liability, but they also generate testable hypotheses and healthy debate. If hypotheses later prove to be incorrect, they can be refuted by systematic studies and clarified in reviews and editorials. Our goal of effective education will be reached not by self-censorship but by scientific openness.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
I intended to end the great debate about whether "masking" is preferred to "blinding" when describing clinical trials in which group assignment is concealed from patients, data collectors, and sometimes statisticians. I conducted a highly unscientific survey, mostly of medical journal editors from the World Association of Medical Editors, but also of several strangers and distant relatives. Respondents were asked whether they preferred masking, blinding, or had no preference or considered the distinction to be unimportant. More than 80 people responded, representing 6 continents and several languages. Masking was preferred to blinding 3 to 1. However, the number of people reporting that either term is acceptable or that the issue is unimportant was about the same as the number who voted for masking. I conclude that both terms are acceptable in the context of reporting clinical research and that either may be used without confusion. I pronounce the great debate dead.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Editors have important but indirect roles in sustaining integrity in research, and they have major and highly visible roles in maintaining the integrity of science literature. They must publish the policies and the standards to which they will hold authors and reviewers, and then must enforce those policies. Editors cannot be responsible for the accuracy of what they publish, but they must respond thoroughly and consistently to allegations of misconduct concerning papers under consideration or already published. They must conduct appropriate inquiries and notify authors' or reviewers' institutions about possible misconduct found by those inquiries. Further, to maintain the integrity of the literature, editors must publish corrections, retractions, and notices of duplicate publication according to the standards set down by the National Library of Medicine.
Nursing administrators have exciting programs, thoughts, and experiences that can benefit the nursing community. Suggestions and advice offered by editors, representing seven nursing journals with a readership of nearly 200,000, are presented for those preparing to publish in the professional literature.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.