scholarly journals Compliance with best practice guidelines on publication ethics: Where does Pharmactuel stand? A case study

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Hamel ◽  
Julie Méthot ◽  
Louise Mallet
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Compliance Rate ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Improve Compliance ◽  
Ethics Guidelines

Background: The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) are two internationally recognised organisations in the field of publication ethics. Guidelines from these two organisations were updated in 2018. Objectives: To assess the extent to which the journal Pharmactuel is compliant with the guidelines on publication ethics updated by ICMJE and COPE in 2018 and, where the journal is found  wanting, to take the necessary steps to make it compliant. Methods:  A list of updated criteria – 56 by ICMJE and 22 by COPE – was compiled. In January 2020, compliance with each of these criteria was evaluated by the editor-in-chief and validated by all six associate editors. The evaluation was followed by an action plan to improve compliance, and the evaluation was repeated in November 2020. Results: Of the 56 ICMJE criteria, Pharmactuel was fully compliant with 31 and partly compliant with 10 criteria (a compliance rate of 73%, taking the two together). The corresponding figures for the 22 COPE criteria were 17, 3, and 91%. By modifying its editorial policies, training its associate editors, and creating appropriate guidelines for its editorial board and editors, Pharmactuel achieved almost 100% compliance by the end of 2020. Conclusions: Pharmactuel has been fully compliant with ICMJE and COPE recommendations since January 2021. Minor modifications to Pharmactuel’s publication process have enabled the editorial team to ensure that the journal continues to be almost totally compliant with COPE and ICMJE guidelines and to uphold its high ethical standards.

scholarly journals Challenges in publication ethics

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (04) ◽  
pp. 241-243
Author(s):  
V Barbour ◽  
B Astaneh ◽  
M Irfan
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Scientific Misconduct ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
The Impact

‘Some editors are failed writers, but so are most writers.’ TS Eliot (1888–1965) Have you ever wondered what medical journal editors do? Most editors in the medical field are unpaid and the work is part of the wider culture of service provided by so many in the medical profession. Together with the editorial board and the publisher, an editor will decide the direction of the journal. For instance, decisions are made about what sort of material should be published. One of the most common tasks, however, is the daily screening of manuscripts submitted for publication, many of which are rejected without peer review owing to poor quality, redundant material or the subject of the article being beyond the scope of the journal. After deciding which peer reviewers to send an article to, the editor must make a final decision on a manuscript, which may not necessarily concur with the advice given by the reviewers. With this comes a huge amount of personal responsibility and one to the organisation the editor represents. Take the example of George Lundberg, the editor of JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, who was fired from his position after 17 years with the alleged faux pas of rushing to publish an article to coincide with the Clinton impeachment hearings ‘to extract political leverage.’ Lundberg published research showing that 60% of college students surveyed in 1991 did not think that engaging in oral sex was classed as actually ‘having sex.’ 1 While neither the methods used in the survey nor the results were disputed, the timing of the publication at an awkward political juncture was. Extrapolating this, editors are therefore not just responsible for the content of what is published but also the impact of publications in the wider arena. Editors must also handle a great deal of correspondence, including author queries and complaints, and respond to them in a timely manner. Communication with the team, the publisher, authors and readers is a vital skill. Finally, the editor needs to deal with the journal’s ethical policy when examples of plagiarism, author disputes or other forms of misconduct are evident. Breaches of publication ethics are forms of scientific misconduct that can undermine science and challenge editors, many of whom have little formal training in this field. In this respect, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), founded in 1997 as a voluntary body, has become a central player. COPE provides a discussion forum and advice as well as guidelines for scientific editors with the aim of finding practical ways to deal with forms of misconduct. The Annals is a member of COPE and follows its code of conduct for journal editors. 2 It is a privilege that the current chair of COPE, Dr Barbour, and her colleagues have written this final article in the medical publishing series about challenges in publication ethics. I hope you have found this series useful and enjoyed reading the range of articles we have published from many experts in their fields. JYOTI SHAH Commissioning Editor References 1. Sanders SA , Reinisch JM . Would you say you ‘had sex’ if…? JAMA 1999 ; 281 : 275 – 277 . 2. Committee on Publication Ethics . Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors . Harleston, UK : COPE ; 2011 .

Welcome to PASJ: A New Frontier in Pan-African Scientific Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. 01-02
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Publication Output ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Emerging Infectious Diseases ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Science Journal ◽  
Monthly Basis ◽  
Pan African

On behalf of the editorial board of Pan African Science Journal (PASJ), I take this opportunity to introduce to you Pan African Science Journal (PASJ) which is a new journal with focus on physical and life sciences. The PASJ publishes on a bi-monthly basis. We publish editorial notes, review articles, full research articles, letters to and case studies on all aspects of physical and life sciences under the topics of Microbiology, Molecular Biology, Public Health, Biotechnology, Biochemistry, Botany, Zoology, Environmental Ecology and Fisheries & Aquatic Ecology. PASJ editorial team consists of young and vibrant scientists and academicians from various parts of the world whose scientific specializations covers all the designated journal topics. The highly qualified and dedicated expert editorial team will endeavor to professionally guide the entire PASJ publication process. PASJ comes as a unique international journal whose major focus is to promote African scientific works and publication standards through contribution to the dissemination of scientific knowledge and opinion that emanate from Africa and beyond. PASJ’s main aim is to upscale the quality of scientific output, specifically by Africans/within Africa, through playing a pivotal role in affordably, effectively and efficiently publishing of high-quality scientific work, while adhering to and upholding all the internationally binding scientific publication ethics and standards. It aims at bridging the wide gap that exists in scientific publication output between the researchers/academicians from developed and developing countries such as African nations. The inauguration of PASJ comes at a time when the contribution of science to solving major global problems such as climate change, food insecurity, environmental pollution and emerging infectious diseases such as the COVID 19 is key. I hope that we will support each other in this journey to progress and ensure that the PASJ professionally drives its mandate and continue to achieve the purpose for its formation to ensure that it becomes a reputable Journal of choice in Africa and beyond. Thank you, and we welcome you as we engage and corporate in this new and exciting journey.

scholarly journals Key Service Improvements After the Introduction of an Integrated Orthogeriatric Service

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 215145931989389 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. P. Murphy ◽  
C. Reddin ◽  
E. P. Murphy ◽  
R. Waters ◽  
C. G. Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Fracture Care ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Improve Compliance

Introduction: Models of orthogeriatric care have been shown to improve functional outcomes for patients after hip fractures and can improve compliance with best practice guidelines for hip fracture care. Methods: We evaluated improvements to key performance indicators in hip fracture care after implementation of a formal orthogeriatric service. Compliance with Irish Hip Fracture standards of care was reviewed, and additional outcomes such as length of stay, access to rehabilitation, and discharge destination were evaluated. Results: Improvements were observed in all of the hip fracture standards of care. Mean length of stay decreased from 19 to 15.5 days (mean difference 3.5 days; P < .05). A higher proportion of patients were admitted to rehabilitation (16.7% vs 7.9%, P < .05), and this happened in a timelier fashion (17.8 vs 24.8 days, P < .05). We found that less patients required convalescence post-hip fracture. Discussion: A standardized approach to integrated post-hip fracture care with orthogeriatrics has improved standards of care for patients. Conclusion: Introduction of orthogeriatric services has resulted in meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes for older people with hip fractures.

scholarly journals Language Matters: How Baker Library is Working Towards Conscious and Inclusive Description

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Riggle ◽  
Mary Samouelian
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Project Team ◽  
Racial Equality ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Marginalized Groups ◽  
Counter Narrative ◽  
Working Together ◽  
Offensive Language

Inclusive and conscious archival description can support consistency in researching and describing marginalized groups and can serve to provide context and a counter-narrative reflecting the perspective of the documented community. It can also help to address the power imbalances between creators and subjects of records. In this article, the authors describe efforts to prepare best practice guidelines for inclusive description and for revising descriptions to remediate outdated, problematic, or offensive language and meet modern standards. They also share how the project team is working together to create meaningful and enduring changes that both provide a better experience for staff and users and support Harvard Business School’s Action Plan for Racial Equality.

scholarly journals Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: a Publisher's Perspective

2006 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Graf ◽  
Elizabeth Wager ◽  
Alyson Bowman ◽  
Suzan Fiack ◽  
Diane Scott-Lichter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines

scholarly journals Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Editorial Board
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Ethical Standards ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines

Journal of Scientific Research (JSR) is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards. In order to ensure the outcome of providing our readers with an academic journal of high quality, JSR is guided by standard publication Ethics (These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines forJournal Editors). 

Opioid crisis in primary care? An audit of high-dose opioid prescribing at Bangholm GP Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711581
Author(s):  
Charlotte Greene ◽  
Alice Pearson
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Opioid Prescription ◽  
Opioid Prescribing ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines

BackgroundOpioids are effective analgesics for acute and palliative pain, but there is no evidence base for long-term pain relief. They also carry considerable risks such as overdose and dependence. Despite this, they are increasingly prescribed for chronic pain. In the UK, opioid prescribing more than doubled between 1998 and 2018.AimAn audit at Bangholm GP Practice to understand the scale of high-strength opioid prescribing. The aim of the audit was to find out if indications, length of prescription, discussion, and documentation at initial consultation and review process were consistent with best-practice guidelines.MethodA search on Scottish Therapeutics Utility for patients prescribed an average daily dose of opioid equivalent ≥50 mg morphine between 1 July 2019 and 1 October 2019, excluding methadone, cancer pain, or palliative prescriptions. The Faculty of Pain Medicine’s best-practice guidelines were used.ResultsDemographics: 60 patients (37 females), average age 62, 28% registered with repeat opioid prescription, 38% comorbid depression. Length of prescription: average 6 years, 57% >5 years, 22% >10 years. Opioid: 52% tramadol, 23% on two opioids. Indications: back pain (42%), osteoarthritis (12%), fibromyalgia (10%). Initial consultation: 7% agreed outcomes, 35% follow-up documented. Review: 56% 4-week, 70% past year.ConclusionOpioid prescribing guidelines are not followed. The significant issues are: long-term prescriptions for chronic pain, especially back pain; new patients registering with repeat prescriptions; and no outcomes of treatment agreed, a crucial message is the goal is pain management rather than relief. Changes have been introduced at the practice: a patient information sheet, compulsory 1-month review for new patients on opioids, and in-surgery pain referrals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document