scholarly journals High non publication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices: a replication study in Europe

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M Marchington
Keyword(s):  
Publication Rate ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Replication Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Quality Reporting ◽  
Medical Publication ◽  
The Us ◽  
European Meeting ◽  
Professional Research ◽  
Clinical Trial Results

Background: Although publication professionals plan and facilitate the timely and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results, it has been previously shown that they are not as forthcoming when it comes to publishing their own professional research. The publication rate from abstracts presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has been shown to be 2.4%. We performed a replication study based on the European Meeting of ISMPP to determine the equivalent publication rate. Methods: ISMPP European Meeting abstract lists (November 2011–January 2016), were searched in July 2016 and extracted into a copy of the original study spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in August 2016 to determine the publication rate. Results: From 2011 to 2016, 76 abstracts were submitted of which 60 were accepted (78.9%). We found three corresponding publications (publication rate 5.0%). Most studies were observational (50/60; 83.3%) and most abstracts included employees of medical communications agencies as authors (50/60; 83.3%). Most researchers were based in Europe (165/222; 74.3%) or the US (53/222; 23.9%). Discussion: This study confirms previous findings that the publication rate of member research from ISMPP meetings in the peer-reviewed literature is low. Members of ISMPP, and of other organizations who aspire to set professional standards, should be encouraged to conduct robust research and share it with the academic community.

scholarly journals High non publication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices: a replication study in Europe

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M Marchington
Keyword(s):  
Publication Rate ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Replication Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Quality Reporting ◽  
Medical Publication ◽  
The Us ◽  
European Meeting ◽  
Professional Research ◽  
Clinical Trial Results

Background: Although publication professionals plan and facilitate the timely and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results, it has been previously shown that they are not as forthcoming when it comes to publishing their own professional research. The publication rate from abstracts presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has been shown to be 2.4%. We performed a replication study based on the European Meeting of ISMPP to determine the equivalent publication rate. Methods: ISMPP European Meeting abstract lists (November 2011–January 2016), were searched in July 2016 and extracted into a copy of the original study spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in August 2016 to determine the publication rate. Results: From 2011 to 2016, 76 abstracts were submitted of which 60 were accepted (78.9%). We found three corresponding publications (publication rate 5.0%). Most studies were observational (50/60; 83.3%) and most abstracts included employees of medical communications agencies as authors (50/60; 83.3%). Most researchers were based in Europe (165/222; 74.3%) or the US (53/222; 23.9%). Discussion: This study confirms previous findings that the publication rate of member research from ISMPP meetings in the peer-reviewed literature is low. Members of ISMPP, and of other organizations who aspire to set professional standards, should be encouraged to conduct robust research and share it with the academic community.

scholarly journals High non publication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke C Carey ◽  
Serina Stretton ◽  
Charlotte A Kenreigh ◽  
Linda T Wagner ◽  
Karen L Woolley
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Publication Rate ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Publication Planning ◽  
Annual Meeting Abstract ◽  
Quality Reporting ◽  
Medical Publication ◽  
Publication Practices

Background. The need for timely, ethical, and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results has seen a rise in demand for publication professionals. These publication experts, who are not ghostwriters, work with leading medical researchers and funders around the world to plan and prepare thousands of publications each year. Despite the involvement of publication professionals in an increasing number of peer-reviewed publications, especially those that affect patient care, there is limited evidence-based guidance in the peer-reviewed literature on their publication practices. Similar to the push for editors and the peer-review community to conduct and publish research on publication ethics and the peer-review process, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has encouraged members to conduct and publish research on publication planning and practices. Our primary objective was to investigate the publication rate of research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings. Methods. ISMPP Annual Meeting abstract lists (April 2009 to April 2014) were searched in November 2014 and data were extracted into a pilot-tested spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in December 2014 to determine the publication rate (calculated as the % of presented abstracts published as full papers in peer-reviewed journals). Data were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test (significance: P <.05) by an independent academic statistician. Results. From 2009 to 2014, there were 220 abstracts submitted, 185 accepted, and 164 presented. There were only four corresponding publications (publication rate 2.4%). Over time, ISMPP’s abstract acceptance rate (overall: 84.1%) did not change, but the number of abstracts presented increased significantly (P = .02). Most abstracts were presented as posters (81.1%) and most research was observational (72.6%). Most researchers came from the US (78.0%), followed by Europe (17.7%), and the Asia-Pacific region (11.2%). Discussion. Research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings has rarely been published in peer-reviewed journals. The high-rate of non publication by publication professionals has now been quantified and is of concern. Publication professionals should do more to contribute to evidence‑based publication practices, including, and especially, their own. Unless the barriers to publication are identified and addressed, the practices of publication professionals, which affect thousands of peer-reviewed publications each year, will remain hidden and unproven.

scholarly journals High non publication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke C Carey ◽  
Serina Stretton ◽  
Charlotte A Kenreigh ◽  
Linda T Wagner ◽  
Karen L Woolley
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Publication Rate ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Publication Planning ◽  
Annual Meeting Abstract ◽  
Quality Reporting ◽  
Medical Publication ◽  
Publication Practices

Background. The need for timely, ethical, and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results has seen a rise in demand for publication professionals. These publication experts, who are not ghostwriters, work with leading medical researchers and funders around the world to plan and prepare thousands of publications each year. Despite the involvement of publication professionals in an increasing number of peer-reviewed publications, especially those that affect patient care, there is limited evidence-based guidance in the peer-reviewed literature on their publication practices. Similar to the push for editors and the peer-review community to conduct and publish research on publication ethics and the peer-review process, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has encouraged members to conduct and publish research on publication planning and practices. Our primary objective was to investigate the publication rate of research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings. Methods. ISMPP Annual Meeting abstract lists (April 2009 to April 2014) were searched in November 2014 and data were extracted into a pilot-tested spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in December 2014 to determine the publication rate (calculated as the % of presented abstracts published as full papers in peer-reviewed journals). Data were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test (significance: P <.05) by an independent academic statistician. Results. From 2009 to 2014, there were 220 abstracts submitted, 185 accepted, and 164 presented. There were only four corresponding publications (publication rate 2.4%). Over time, ISMPP’s abstract acceptance rate (overall: 84.1%) did not change, but the number of abstracts presented increased significantly (P = .02). Most abstracts were presented as posters (81.1%) and most research was observational (72.6%). Most researchers came from the US (78.0%), followed by Europe (17.7%), and the Asia-Pacific region (11.2%). Discussion. Research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings has rarely been published in peer-reviewed journals. The high-rate of non publication by publication professionals has now been quantified and is of concern. Publication professionals should do more to contribute to evidence‑based publication practices, including, and especially, their own. Unless the barriers to publication are identified and addressed, the practices of publication professionals, which affect thousands of peer-reviewed publications each year, will remain hidden and unproven.

scholarly journals High nonpublication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices

PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke C. Carey ◽  
Serina Stretton ◽  
Charlotte A. Kenreigh ◽  
Linda T. Wagner ◽  
Karen L. Woolley
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Publication Rate ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Publication Planning ◽  
Annual Meeting Abstract ◽  
Quality Reporting ◽  
Medical Publication ◽  
Publication Practices

Background.The need for timely, ethical, and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results has seen a rise in demand for publication professionals. These publication experts, who are not ghostwriters, work with leading medical researchers and funders around the world to plan and prepare thousands of publications each year. Despite the involvement of publication professionals in an increasing number of peer-reviewed publications, especially those that affect patient care, there is limited evidence-based guidance in the peer-reviewed literature on their publication practices. Similar to the push for editors and the peer-review community to conduct and publish research on publication ethics and the peer-review process, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has encouraged members to conduct and publish research on publication planning and practices. Our primary objective was to investigate the publication rate of research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings.Methods.ISMPP Annual Meeting abstract lists (April 2009–April 2014) were searched in November 2014 and data were extracted into a pilot-tested spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in December 2014 to determine the publication rate (calculated as the % of presented abstracts published as full papers in peer-reviewed journals). Data were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test (significance:P< .05) by an independent academic statistician.Results.From 2009 to 2014, there were 220 abstracts submitted, 185 accepted, and 164 presented. There were four corresponding publications (publication rate 2.4%). Over time, ISMPP’s abstract acceptance rate (overall: 84.1%) did not change, but the number of abstracts presented increased significantly (P= .02). Most abstracts were presented as posters (81.1%) and most research was observational (72.6%). Most researchers came from the US (78.0%), followed by Europe (17.7%), and the Asia-Pacific region (11.2%).Discussion.Research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings has rarely been published in peer-reviewed journals. The high rate of nonpublication by publication professionals has now been quantified and is of concern. Publication professionals should do more to contribute to evidence-based publication practices, including, and especially, their own. Unless the barriers to publication are identified and addressed, the practices of publication professionals, which affect thousands of peer-reviewed publications each year, will remain hidden and unproven.

Systematic review methodology for development: An example from microfinance

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carina Van Rooyen ◽  
Ruth Stewart ◽  
Thea De Wet
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
International Development ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Systematic Review Methodology ◽  
Development Interventions ◽  
The Us ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Big international development donors such as the UK’s Department for International Development and USAID have recently started using systematic review as a methodology to assess the effectiveness of various development interventions to help them decide what is the ‘best’ intervention to spend money on. Such an approach to evidence-based decision-making has long been practiced in the health sector in the US, UK, and elsewhere but it is relatively new in the development field. In this article we use the case of a systematic review of the impact of microfinance on the poor in sub-Saharan African to indicate how systematic review as a methodology can be used to assess the impact of specific development interventions.

The Gnosis of Toni Morrison: Morrison’s Conversation with Herman Melville, with a Nod to Umberto Eco

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-376
Author(s):  
Justine Tally
Keyword(s):  
Toni Morrison ◽  
Herman Melville ◽  
Global Market ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
American Renaissance ◽  
Moby Dick ◽  
Nag Hammadi ◽  
The Us ◽  
The University ◽  
The Rose

Abstract Long before Toni Morrison was extensively recognized as a serious contender in the “Global Market of Intellectuals,” she was obviously reading and absorbing challenging critical work that was considered “provocative and controversial” by the keepers of the US academic community at the time. While no one disputes the influence of Elaine Pagels’ work on Gnosticism at the University of Princeton, particularly its importance for Jazz and Paradise, the second and third novels of the Morrison trilogy, Gnosticism in Beloved has not been so carefully considered. Yet this keen interest in Gnosticism coupled with the author’s systematic study of authors from the mid-19th-century American Renaissance inevitably led her to deal with the fascination of Renaissance authors with Egypt (where the Nag Hammadi manuscripts were rediscovered), its ancient civilization, and its mythology. The extensive analysis of a leading French literary critic of Herman Melville, Prof. Viola Sachs, becomes the inspiration for a startlingly different reading of Morrison’s seminal novel, one that positions this author in a direct dialogue with the premises of Melville’s masterpiece, Moby-Dick, also drawing on the importance of Gnosticism for Umberto Eco’s 1980 international best-seller, The Name of the Rose.

scholarly journals The Disclosure Decision of Foreign Clinical Trials in China: Moderating Effects of Firms’ Contingencies

SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 215824402110163
Author(s):  
Tariq H. Malik ◽  
Chunhui Huo
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Moderating Effects ◽  
The Public ◽  
Industrial Enterprises ◽  
Unit Increase ◽  
Clinical Trial Results ◽  
Clinical Trial Activity

Result disclosure of clinical trial posts a conflicting logic between private secrecy and public interest. Despite ethical and legal requirements for disclosing clinical trial results, clinical trials’ sponsors tend to withhold the results. We explored the location, timing, and rationale behind the withheld clinical trial results. Based on the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) perspective, we propose that organizational EO contingencies moderate the disclosure decision. We used the completed clinical trial projects in China by foreign and domestic sponsors. First, we found that a unit increase in the sponsor’s experience can increase the disclosure about 1.01 times. Second, we found that industrial enterprises disclose results about 3.7 times more than universities do. Third, we found that foreign clinical trial projects in China tend to disclose 3.9 times more than domestic projects. We link these findings to two types of audience. First, we inform the academic community on the theory and empirics regarding risk-taking behavior in the biopharmaceutical industry’s clinical trial activity. Second, we address the general audiences concerned about the ethical and socioeconomic wellbeing of the public.

Evidence Based Medical Prevention: International Experience

2016 ◽  
pp. 34-37
Author(s):  
Olha Puzanovа
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Preventive Medicine ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
International Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Task Forces ◽  
Cochrane Reviews ◽  
The Us ◽  
Based Medicine

The objective: was to study the international experience of evidence based preventive medicine development as well as to estimate its perspectives in Ukraine. Patients and methods. Main principles and methods of scientific knowledge and research have been used including universal ones, methods of systemic approach, quantitative and qualitative information analysis, classification and systematization of theoretical and empirical data, hystorical and logical methods, health statistics as well). In total 529 scientific information sources have been studied, particularly a number of evidence based medicine (EBM) computer databases, special task forces recommendations and Cochrane reviews on prevention, Register of medical and technological documents for health care standards in Ukraine et al. Results. The contribution of foreign scientific schools in the development of EBM has been determined, as well as the crucial role of scientific works carried out in the US and Great Britain in 1930–80s as to the development of evidence based preventive medicine. The international experience of the development and functioning of evidence based practice centers’ and special task forces on prevention has been summarized, as the experience of the development and implementation of recommendations on prevention in primary health care (PHC) in high income countries acceptable for Ukraine. The concept of evidence based prevention has been first proposed. It is revealed, that EBM implementation in Europe has been prioritized in both the field of infectious diseases prevention and PHC, while there are both the development of differentiated evidence based prevention and early evidence based diagnosis in PHC in the US. Conclusion. The results proved importance of taking into consideration of international experience while evidence based PHC is being developed as a priority in Ukraine.

scholarly journals Using Medline to achieve an evidence-based approach to diagnostic clinical biochemistry

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M Fielding ◽  
Anne Powell
Keyword(s):  
Key Words ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Clinical Biochemistry ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Search Technique ◽  
National Library ◽  
Mesh Terms ◽  
The Us ◽  
Minimum Number ◽  
Structured Approach

Medline is the US National Library of Medicine database that is used for searching the medical biochemistry literature. The database is structured using medical subject subheadings (MeSH terms) to classify the content of references; indexing is done manually using MeSH terms as key words. Searching the database effectively means finding the maximum number of relevant references together with the minimum number of irrelevant ones. This article is aimed at explaining the limitations of Medline and suggesting some solutions to key problems. The goal is that users can improve their literature search technique by employing a structured approach. As usual, asking relevant questions before starting a search is essential.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document