Improving and spreading plain language summaries of peer-reviewed medical journal publications

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

How Can We Optimize the Readability and Format of Plain Language Summaries for Medical Journal Articles? A Cross-sectional Survey Study (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.22122 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Leia Martínez Silvagnoli ◽

Caroline Shepherd ◽

James Pritchett ◽

Jason Gardner

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Age Groups ◽

Weighted Average ◽

Joint Disease ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Survey Study ◽

Plain Language ◽

Journal Articles ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Disease States

BACKGROUND Plain language summaries (PLS) are intended to provide readers with a clear, non-technical, and easily understandable overview of medical and scientific literature; however, audience preferences for specific PLS format have yet to be fully explored. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the preferred readability level and format for PLS of medical journal articles across different disease states, with online audiences from various age groups. METHODS Articles describing phase III clinical trials from top-level, peer-reviewed journals published between May 2016–May 2018 were identified for three disease states representing a range of patient age groups (psoriasis, a skin disease [younger patients]; multiple sclerosis [MS], a nerve-based disease [middle-aged patients]; and rheumatoid arthritis [RA], a painful joint disease [older patients]). Four PLS were developed for each article: three as text only (written with high-, medium-, and low-complexity) and one as an infographic. To evaluate each of the four PLS formats, a 20-question survey (specific to one of the three diseases) was sent to a representative sample, via UK-based patient association websites, Twitter, and Facebook patient groups. A weighted-average calculation was applied to responders’ ranked preferences for each PLS format. RESULTS Across all three diseases, the weighted-average preference scores showed that infographics (psoriasis=2.91; MS=2.71; RA=2.78) and medium-complexity text PLS (reading age: 14–17 years, US Grade 9–11; psoriasis=2.90; MS=2.47; RA=2.77) were the two most-preferred PLS formats in each case. CONCLUSIONS Audience preferences should be accounted for when preparing PLS to accompany original peer-reviewed research articles. Oversimplified text can be viewed negatively, and infographic versions or medium-complexity text appear to be the most popular.

Download Full-text

Protection of Personal Information in Medical Journal Publications

Neurointervention ◽

10.5469/neuroint.2019.00031 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 1-8 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sun Huh

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Personal Information ◽

Journal Publications

Download Full-text

Authorship trends in the Egyptian orthopedic journal (from 2012 to 2020), as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journals

Bulletin of the National Research Centre ◽

10.1186/s42269-021-00531-z ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 45 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Ahmed A. Khalifa ◽

Ahmed S. El-Hawary ◽

Ahmed E. Sadek

Keyword(s):

Medical Journal ◽

Bachelor's Degree ◽

Medical Journals ◽

Orthopaedic Journal ◽

Journal Publications ◽

Single Authorship ◽

The Mean ◽

Low Incidence ◽

Young Researchers ◽

Number Of Authors

Abstract Background Authorship trends in medical journals were studied in many disciplines, mostly in western countries' journals. We aimed at studying the authorship trends in the Egyptian Orthopaedic Journal as an example of a specialized Egyptian medical journal. Results A total of 397 articles were eligible for analysis. The mean number of authors per article was 2 ± 1 (range from 1 to 6), 161 (40.6%) articles were single authorship. The degree of the first author was reported in 305 (76.6%), the first author carried an M.D. degree in 302 (99%) articles, and in three (1%), the first author carried a master’s degree. No authors with a bachelor's degree were reported. Forty-two institutions contributed to the publications, 14 (33.3%) international and 28 (66.7%) Egyptian national institutions. In 368 (92.7%) articles, all the authors were from the same institution, and 29 (7.3%) articles were published as a cooperation between different institutions with a mean 1.1 ± 0.3 institution per article. International contribution to the journal was found in 21 (5.3%) articles. The orthopedic department from Cairo university was the most contributing department to the journal publications. Conclusions The old trend of single authorship prevails in the journal publications with a notable deficiency in young researchers’ contribution to the journal and low incidence of international contribution and poor national institution cooperation.

Download Full-text