ABSTRACT
The growing interest in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among the public, patients, physicians, and academic medical centers has been accompanied by an increasing amount of research and publication of articles on unconventional medicine in mainstream biomedical journals. This presentation highlights recent trends in the publication of research articles on CAM therapies in major medical journals; delineates issues related to journal policies, scientific evaluation, and editorial decision-making regarding submitted manuscripts; and discusses the role of leading medical journals in providing reliable, evidence-based information on complementary and alternative medicine to the medical community and the public.
Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/standards , Journalism, Medical/standards , Research/standards , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Quality Control , United StatesSubject(s)
Advertising , Asphyxia/prevention & control , Disasters , Snow , Ventilators, Mechanical , American Medical Association , Humans , Mountaineering , Publishing , Skiing , United StatesSubject(s)
Counseling , Obesity/prevention & control , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Weight Loss , HumansABSTRACT
Virtually all physicians involved in clinical practice are realizing that the delivery of highest caliber medical care requires a blend of appropriate training, adequate experience, the proper amount of "art," empathetic interpersonal skills, respect for patient preferences, and, more than ever, an evidence-based approach firmly grounded in methodologically sound scientific studies. This article provides an overview of the issue, explaining the evidence-based approach to the many diagnostic studies discussed in the ensuing articles.
Subject(s)
Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Emergency Medicine , Evidence-Based Medicine , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Physician-Patient Relations , Quality Assurance, Health Care , United StatesABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Authorship in biomedical publications establishes accountability, responsibility, and credit. Misappropriation of authorship undermines the integrity of the authorship system, but accurate data on its prevalence are limited. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of articles with honorary authors (named authors who have not met authorship criteria) and ghost authors (individuals not named as authors but who contributed substantially to the work) in peer-reviewed medical journals and to identify journal characteristics and article types associated with such authorship misappropriation. DESIGN: Mailed, self-administered, confidential survey. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 809 corresponding authors (1179 surveyed, 69% response rate) of articles published in 1996 in 3 peer-reviewed, large-circulation general medical journals (Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, and The New England Journal of Medicine) and 3 peer-reviewed, smaller-circulation journals that publish supplements (American Journal of Cardiology, American Journal of Medicine, and American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors, as reported by corresponding authors. RESULTS: Of the 809 articles, 492 were original research reports, 240 were reviews and articles not reporting original data, and 77 were editorials. A total of 156 articles (1 9%) had evidence of honorary authors (range, 11%-25% among journals); 93 articles (11%) had evidence of ghost authors (range, 7%-16% among journals); and 13 articles (2%) had evidence of both. The prevalence of articles with honorary authors was greater among review articles than research articles (odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.6) but did not differ significantly between large-circulation and smaller-circulation journals (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.96-2.03). Compared with similar-type articles in large-circulation journals, articles with ghost authors in smaller-circulation journals were more likely to be reviews (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.5-13.5) and less likely to be research articles (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27-0.88). CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of articles in peer-reviewed medical journals demonstrate evidence of honorary authors or ghost authors.
Subject(s)
Authorship , Biomedical Research , Peer Review , Periodicals as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Editorial Policies , Publishing/standards , Social ResponsibilityABSTRACT
Intensified research efforts in emergency medicine have resulted in a unique body of knowledge based on investigations involving emergency patients and conducted by emergency medicine researchers. The success and effectiveness of emergency medicine publications in the future rely on adherence to rigorous standards for peer review and editorial evaluation, introduction of value-added innovations, creative applications for electronic publication of scientific materials, and an unyielding commitment to quality and integrity.