The Evolution of Medical Research Writing from 1735 to 1985: The Case of the Edinburgh Medical Journal

Background and aim. Medical research needs statistical analyses to understand the reality of variable phenomena. There are numerous studies showing poor statistical reporting in many journals with different rankings, in different countries. Our aim was to assess the reporting of statistical analyses in original papers published in Clujul Medical journal in the year 2014.Methods. All original articles published in Clujul Medical in the year 2014 were assessed using mainly Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature guidelines.Results. The most important issues found in reporting statistical analyses were reduced reporting of: assumptions checking, difference between groups or measures of associations, confidence intervals for the primary outcomes, and errors in the statistical test choice or the descriptive statistic choice for several analyses. These results are similar with other studies assessing different journals worldwide.Conclusion. Statistical reporting in Clujul Medical, like in other journals, have to be improved.

Download Full-text

La Revista Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología como valor para la Federación Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología, FECOLSOG

Revista Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología ◽

10.18597/rcog.3285 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 69 (4) ◽

pp. 235

Author(s):

Hernando Gaitán-Duarte ◽

Jorge Andrés Rubio-Romero ◽

Carlos Fernando Grillo-Ardila

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

British Medical Journal ◽

Medical Association ◽

Medical School ◽

Royal Society ◽

Natural Knowledge ◽

Siglo Xix ◽

De Medicina ◽

Edinburgh Medical ◽

Royal Society Of London

Las sociedades científicas tienen como uno de sus más nobles objetivos la promoción de la ciencia en los diferentes campos del conocimiento. La primera sociedad científica fue la Royal Society of London, fundada en 1660 en el Reino Unido, también conocida como la Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge. La sociedad fue creada como “un colegio para la promoción del aprendizaje físico-matemático experimental” que publicó, en el año de 1666, la primera revista científica, Philosophycal Transactions (1, 2) y fue la publicación científica más importante hasta el siglo XIX, cuando aparecieron las revistas científicas especializadas. En Philosophycal Transactions se publicaron inicialmente noticias, cartas y descripciones de informes experimentales sin un formato o estilo estandarizado (3). La primera entidad en publicar una revista médica fue el Edinburgh Medical School, que divulgó el Medical Essays and Observations en 1731, que se transformó dos años más tarde en el Edinburgh Medical Journal y contó con revisión por pares desde el año de 1733 (4). La primera revista médica en Estados Unidos fue la Medical Repository, que apareció en 1797 (5). En el Reino Unido aparecen The Lancet en 1823, para publicar el trabajo desarrollado en las escuelas médicas de Londres y el reporte de casos, y el British Medical Journal en 1853, como resultado de la creación de la British Medical Association (4). En el año 1887, Philosophycal Transactions se dividió en dos nuevas revistas: una dedicada a la publicación de temas de matemáticas y física, y la segunda a temas de biología. A partir de 1989 realizó una importante innovación: la revisión anónima de los contenidos por pares. Los hechos enunciados recuerdan que las revistas científicas médicas se han originado en las sociedades científicas y en las escuelas de medicina con el objetivo de presentar tanto la metodología como los resultados de las investigaciones realizadas, con la característica desde sus inicios de realizar un proceso anónimo y riguroso de revisión por pares.

Download Full-text

Endorsement of Standard Reporting Guidelines by PubMed Indexed Indian Medical Journals (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.32928 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Alhad Mulkalwar ◽

Purva Gaidhane

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Medical Research ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Reporting Guidelines ◽

Published Data ◽

Accurate Evaluation ◽

Quality Of Evidence ◽

Indian Medical ◽

Quality Of Research

UNSTRUCTURED Reporting guidelines have become very important tools in medical research. These guidelines improve the completeness, accuracy and transparency of reporting the crucial aspects of research studies. This aids not only in accurate evaluation of the methodological quality of research and validity of the results, but also improves the quality of evidence synthesized from published data for application in practice.It’s important for the publishers to incorporate these guidelines in their ‘Instructions to Authors’ on the journal website. We documented the extent of endorsement of the five commonly used standard guidelines CONSORT, QUOROM, MOOSE, PRISMA, STROBE and CARE by fifty PubMed indexed Indian Medical journal

Download Full-text

2. English Retrospect

Journal of Mental Science ◽

10.1017/s0368315x00006009 ◽

1874 ◽

Vol 20 (90) ◽

pp. 307-315

Author(s):

James Maclaren

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Edinburgh Medical

The following are extracts from Dr. Laycock's paper “On certain organic disorders and defects of memory,” published in the “Edinburgh Medical Journal,” for April, 1874:—

Download Full-text

Publishing Your Research–II

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine ◽

10.1017/s1049023x00067534 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 8 (S1) ◽

pp. S47-S50

Author(s):

Marvin L. Birnbaum

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Medical Research ◽

Peer Review ◽

Learning Process ◽

Principal Reason ◽

Practice Of Medicine

The principal reason to conduct medical research is twofold: 1) to provide an answer to some question that is important to the investigator(s); and 2) to affect the behavior of others involved in the practice of medicine. In order to accomplish the latter of these two objectives, the results of your labors must be published in a reputable medical Journal so that it can impact upon the practice of your peers. To accomplish this, it is necessary to conform to certain rules in the development of the manuscript, and then have the paper evaluated for its relative merits for publication by a panel of your peers. These issues are addressed in this paper.We all tend to be somewhat naive about the need to write in terms that can be understood and appreciated by our peers. Without clarity and understanding, our work has little impact on others. All that will be accomplished is the knowledge that you think you have gained from what you have done. There are several benefits associated with submission of your hard-earned work for review by your peers. Perhaps the most significant is that the process of peer review constitutes a learning process for the reviewers as well as the authors.

Download Full-text

Rubella in Europe

Epidemiology and Infection ◽

10.1017/s0950268800048664 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 107 (1) ◽

pp. 43-54 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

A. Galazka

Keyword(s):

Eighteenth Century ◽

Medical Journal ◽

Scarlet Fever ◽

English Language ◽

Old French ◽

Minor Importance ◽

The Common ◽

Edinburgh Medical

Postnatal rubella is a mild illness, a disease which was considered to be of only minor importance for many years. The first authors to write about the disease as distinct from other exanthemata were German physicians; they differentiated rubella from measles and scarlet fever in the latter part of the eighteenth century and called the disease Rotheln. Hence the common English language eponym is ‘German measles’. Some consider that the term ‘German’ in German measles is probably of literary rather than of geographical significance and that it came from the old French ‘germain’ (derived from the Latin ‘germanus‘), meaning ‘closely akin to’ measles [1]. That it is not generally called by its German name, Rotheln, is due to Veale, a Scottish physician who in 1866 described 30 cases of rubella in the Edinburgh Medical Journal, and proposed ‘rubella’ as a short and euphonius name that could be easily pronounced [2].

Download Full-text

Open Pharma recommendations for plain language summaries of peer-reviewed medical journal publications

10.31222/osf.io/c3m8q ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Adeline Rosenberg ◽

Slávka Baróniková ◽

Linda Feighery ◽

William Gattrell ◽

Rikke Egelund Olsen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Medical Research ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Pharmaceutical Research ◽

Shared Decision ◽

Plain Language ◽

Minimum Standard ◽

Plain Text ◽

Patient Advocates ◽

Medical Publishing

Plain language summaries of peer-reviewed publications are intended for everyone engaging with medical research, such as patients, patient advocates, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers. These summaries encourage discussions around medical research and aid fully informed and shared decision-making. The broad range of stakeholders involved in pharmaceutical research now puts the pharmaceutical industry in a unique position to make the medical publishing model more open. We believe that the next step of openness is to create a more accessible and inclusive environment through the routine development of plain language summaries of peer-reviewed medical journal publications.There are many formats of plain language summaries, but plain text is the most discoverable through indexing in directories such as PubMed. Standardizing the minimum steps for the development and sharing of index-friendly plain language summaries can help promote the quality and credibility of these lay communications. The aim of a minimum standard is to build a universal foundation that encourages the accessibility, discoverability, and inclusivity of plain language summaries. This standard can then serve as a basis for summaries written for a more specific target audience or that include graphically and digitally enhanced formats that increase understanding and engagement, which we strongly encourage.

Download Full-text