Recent Editorial
Recently Published Documents





2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110432
Stefano Negrini ◽  
William Mark Magnus Levack ◽  
Thorsten Meyer ◽  
Carlotte Kiekens

Purpose: Responding to a recent editorial arguing against defining rehabilitation, we discuss the reasons for developing a classification of rehabilitation for research purposes, its philosophical background and some of the possible risks. Why define: Science requires the definition and classification of phenomena to allow replication of experiments and studies, and to allow interpretation and use of the findings. As understanding increases, the definitions can be refined. Defining rehabilitation does run the risk of excluding some interventions or practices that are either considered rehabilitation (perhaps wrongly) or are rehabilitation interventions; when identified, these errors in definition can be remedied. Defining rehabilitation for research purposes should not inhibit but could (possibly) orient research. Risk of not: Without a definition, rehabilitation will remain in a permanent limbo. Experts will (apparently) know what it is, while others are left guessing or failing to comprehend or recognise it. This uncertainty may reassure some people, because all possible interventions are included; we argue that it downgrades the understanding of our field because interventions that are not rehabilitation are, nonetheless, called rehabilitation. In an era of international collaboration, and of undertaking systematic reviews with metanalysis, we need a shared definition. Conclusion: Terminology is often controversial, but definition enables progress in understanding such that terms themselves can evolve over time.

2021 ◽  
Ian Shrier ◽  
Tyrel Stokes ◽  
Russell John Steele

A recent editorial in the British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) suggested instrumental var-iable (IV) analysis has advantages in estimating causal effects when there is low compliance. We originally submitted a version of this commentary to BJSM as an editorial (they do not have a letter to editor section) but it was rejected without review. The original BJSM editorial included several important errors, presented results that are inconsistent with the results of an IV analysis, and omitted definitions and important limitations. All of these factors contrib-uted to inappropriate interpretations. This commentary highlights the most important er-rors. We also believe the BJSM editorial serves as another reminder that appropriate statisti-cians should be included from the beginning of the study wherever possible. At the very least, they should be the co-authors responsible for calculating results and ensuring the write-up is consistent with the results.

Mnemosyne ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Peter Jackson Rova

Abstract The poem by Parmenides is widely recognized as having a decisive influence on Greek philosophy. The text is also notorious for its interpretative problems owing to its obscure poetic style. Among the discordant quotes from the proem, Simplicius uniquely preserves a verse with the unparalleled genitive εὐκυκλέος (literally ‘of [the] well-wheeled’). Contrary to a recent editorial trend in opting for the lectio facilior εὐπειθέος (‘of [the] well-persuasive’), I argue in this paper that the lectio difficilior is genuine testimony to a poetic device designed by Parmenides to perform a pivotal role in the proemial structure as a whole, and to redeploy a key concept in archaic verbal art by means of paronomasia: the ‘glory’ (κλέος) conveyed through the costly medium of song. The proem thus gives characteristic voice to the experimental spirit of inquiry in which Parmenides variously challenged and took his cue from the conceptual framework of encomiastic performance.

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 768-770
Graham R. McClure ◽  
William F. McIntyre ◽  
Richard P. Whitlock ◽  
Emilie P. Belley-Cote

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Khawaja Shehryar Nasir

An overview of the recent editorial and structural changes that have taken place in the Journal of Cancer & Allied Specialties.

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 1005
Sebastiano Mercadante

Reviews are a fundamental space for summarizing and spreading knowledge on a particular topic. Methodologic skills may improve the clarity and the meaning of data presentation. A recent editorial choice provided an advanced update on a topic such as cancer pain, providing meaningful and appropriate information on hot topics of cancer pain management. Recent reviews have reported strange and misleading data, suggesting to some adjuvant drugs or opioids for mild-moderate pain instead of opioids on the basis of an incomprehensible analysis performed without any clinical sense. This is a serious problem because such information, published in an authoritative journal, could dis-educate oncologists in their daily practice.

2019 ◽  
Lorena A. Barba ◽  
Juanjo Bazán ◽  
Jed Brown ◽  
Roman Valls Guimera ◽  
Melissa Gymrek ◽  

A recent editorial in Nature Methods, “Giving Software its Due”, described challenges related to the development of research software and highlighted, in particular, the challenge of software publication and citation. Here, we call attention to a system that we have developed that enables community-driven software review, publication, and citation: The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is an open-source project and an open access journal that provides a light-weight publishing process for research software. Focused on and based in open platforms and on a community of contributors, JOSS evidently satisfies a pressing need, having already published more than 500 articles in approximately three years of existence.

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-160
Paul Counter ◽  
Robert Spillane

In the 50th anniversary issue of The Myth of Mental Illness, Szasz conceded that, conceptually, his argument had been ignored because of the promulgation that mental illnesses are diseases of the brain. Responding to a recent editorial by T. Benning in the British Journal of Psychiatry Bulletin, which is somewhat critical of Szasz’s conceptual arguments, we argue that such criticisms are inaccurate. We highlight how no mental illness stands up to pathological scrutiny, yet treatments can cause iatrogenesis. In addition, we elaborate on how Szasz argued that the false concept of mental illness results in legal fictions. It is therefore important to defend and restate Szasz’s main thesis and conceptual arguments in light of recent criticism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document