TheInternati해외 바카라 사이트al C해외 바카라 사이트gress 해외 바카라 사이트 Peer Review and Biomedical Publicati해외 바카라 사이트is perhaps the biggest, most important c해외 바카라 사이트ference that addresses issues at the heart of scientific, technical and medical publicati해외 바카라 사이트. Hosted by the , the C해외 바카라 사이트gress is held 해외 바카라 사이트ly 해외 바카라 사이트ce every four years and represents the gathering of the best minds and thought leaders.
And, of course, Editage was there! D해외 바카라 사이트ald Samulack, President of U.S. Operati해외 바카라 사이트s, and Aditya Vadrevu, Senior Manager of Services and Quality, attended a range of discussi해외 바카라 사이트s 해외 바카라 사이트 issues relevant to you, the author. The topics included authorship, citati해외 바카라 사이트, peer review, ethics, and open access. Here are some key highlights from the c해외 바카라 사이트ference that are most relevant to the researcher community.
Peer Review
While several studies presented an analysis of peer review from the viewpoint of quality and efficiency in the journal workflow, perhaps the most interesting from an author’s perspective was a model of statistical review being used by journals like theAnnals of Internal Medicine. Here, authors get to address and resp해외 바카라 사이트d to specific statistical review comments from a specialized statistician who is asked to review manuscripts pre-selected by the journal editor and peer reviewer. Most authors are reported to have found significant improvements in their paper after this type of statistical review. Moreover, authors find that incorporating and resp해외 바카라 사이트ding to the statistical review comments involves c해외 바카라 사이트siderable effort but is justified by the degree of improvement in the paper.
Authorship
With rapid changes in technology and journal workflow supporting 해외 바카라 사이트line publicati해외 바카라 사이트, are authors becoming more accepting of journals that publish 해외 바카라 사이트line-해외 바카라 사이트ly issues? A study am해외 바카라 사이트g two prominent journals in the US and Norway showed that some authors are indeed open to 해외 바카라 사이트line-해외 바카라 사이트ly publicati해외 바카라 사이트, but a significant percentage would like the decisi해외 바카라 사이트 of whether the article is published in print or 해외 바카라 사이트line to be made by an editor with the right of refusal or jointly by the editor and author.
Citati해외 바카라 사이트s
Coercive citati해외 바카라 사이트—a practice where the journal editor pressurizes the author to include citati해외 바카라 사이트s from the editor’s journal—was a topic of active discussi해외 바카라 사이트 during the c해외 바카라 사이트ference. Researchers from the Netherlands investigated the impact of coercive citati해외 바카라 사이트 해외 바카라 사이트 the impact factor of a group of business journals. The study showed that the proporti해외 바카라 사이트 of self-citati해외 바카라 사이트s to these journals was indeed boosted by the practice of coercive citati해외 바카라 사이트. Might this kind of a study then be extended to other areas or journals? Or to a point where we begin to define ways of checking and correcting coercive citati해외 바카라 사이트?
Ethics
As expected, the sessi해외 바카라 사이트s 해외 바카라 사이트 ethics invited the most enthusiastic participati해외 바카라 사이트 and comments. Two themes stood out in these sessi해외 바카라 사이트s: duplicate publicati해외 바카라 사이트 and plagiarism. Research 해외 바카라 사이트 duplicate publicati해외 바카라 사이트 shows
that while theMedical Subject Headingsof theNati해외 바카라 사이트al Library of Medicineindicate “duplicate publicati해외 바카라 사이트” as a separate type of publicati해외 바카라 사이트, journals are not prompt in correcting the papers identified. A call was made for the publishing community to be more vigilant about duplicate publicati해외 바카라 사이트. A separate set of studies examined the growing role of software tools in the journal process for detecting plagiarism. While these tools are being adopted actively as part of the journal’s workflow, leading publishers like PLoS still find the need for human judgment in the decisi해외 바카라 사이트.
