Authorship for Research Groups    

Major clinical research investigations, especially large multicenter trials, require the involvement, cooperation, and dedication of many individuals. Roles and responsibilities range from conceiving the study and designing the protocol to collecting and analyzing the data, and numerous essential steps in between. Following completion of the study, the most important responsibilities are prompt preparation of a manuscript that reports the study findings, and timely submission of the paper to a journal for peer review, publication, and communication of the study findings to the scientific and clinical communities. The number of collaborative studies and multicenter clinical trials seems to be growing, with increasing numbers of published articles involving a study group. For instance, 22% of the 185 research articles published in JAMA as Original Contributions in 2001 specifically identified a study group, compared with 6% of 172 Original Contributions published 10 years earlier. Authorship of these studies increasingly involves some indication of group participation and responsibility, reflecting the cooperative nature, multidisciplinary teamwork, and complexity of such investigations.

Flanagin, Annette, Phil B. Fontanarosa and Catherine D. DeAngelis. JAMA (2001). Articles>Scientific Communication>Collaboration

Effects of Technical Editing in Biomedical Journals: A Systematic Review    

The 11 studies on technical editing indicate that it improves the readability of articles slightly (as measured by Gunning Fog and Flesch reading ease scores), may improve other aspects of their quality, can increase the accuracy of references and quotations, and raises the quality of abstracts. Supplying authors with abstract preparation instructions had no discernible effect.

Wager, Elizabeth and Philippa Middleton. JAMA (2002). Articles>Scientific Communication>Assessment

Empirical Studies Assessing the Quality of Health Information for Consumers on the World Wide Web: A Systematic Review

The quality of consumer health information on the World Wide Web is an important issue for medicine, but to date no systematic and comprehensive synthesis of the methods and evidence has been performed.

Eysenbach, Gunther, John Powell, Oliver Kuss and Eun-Ryoung Sa. JAMA (2002). Articles>Scientific Communication>Biomedical>Online

Guidelines for Medical and Health Information Sites on the Internet  

Access to medical information via the Internet has the potential to speed the transformation of the patient-physician relationship from that of physician authority ministering advice and treatment to that of shared decision making between patient and physician. However, barriers impeding this transformation include wide variations in quality of content on the Web, potential for commercial interests to influence online content, and uncertain preservation of personal privacy. To address these issues, the American Medical Association (AMA) has developed principles to guide development and posting of Web site content, govern acquisition and posting of online advertising and sponsorship, ensure site visitors' and patients' rights to privacy and confidentiality, and provide effective and secure means of e-commerce. While these guidelines were developed for the AMA Web sites and visitors to these sites, they also may be useful to other providers and users of medical information on the Web. These principles have been developed with the understanding that they will require frequent revision to keep pace with evolving technology and practices on the Internet. The AMA encourages review and feedback from readers, Web site visitors, policymakers, and all others interested in providing reliable quality information via the Web.

Winker, Margaret A., Annette Flanagin, Bonnie Chi-Lum, John White, Karen Andrews, Robert L. Kennett, Catherine D. DeAngelis and Robert A. Musacchio. JAMA (2000). Articles>Web Design>Biomedical

Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review    

The quality of a process can only be tested against its agreed objectives. Editorial peer-review is widely used, yet there appears to be little agreement about how to measure its effects or processes. Ten studies used a variety of instruments to assess the quality of articles that had undergone peer review. Only 1, nonrandomized study compared the quality of articles published in peer-reviewed and non–peer-reviewed journals. The others measured the effects of variations in the peer-review process or used a before-and-after design to measure the effects of standard peer review on accepted articles. Eighteen studies measured the quality of reviewers' reports under different conditions such as blinding or after training. One study compared the time and cost of different review processes.

Jefferson, Tom, Elizabeth Wager and Frank Davidoff. JAMA (2002). Articles>Scientific Communication>Editing

Narrative Medicine: A Model for Empathy, Reflection, Profession, and Trust  

The effective practice of medicine requires narrative competence, that is, the ability to acknowledge, absorb, interpret, and act on the stories and plights of others. Medicine practiced with narrative competence, called narrative medicine, is proposed as a model for humane and effective medical practice. Adopting methods such as close reading of literature and reflective writing allows narrative medicine to examine and illuminate 4 of medicine's central narrative situations: physician and patient, physician and self, physician and colleagues, and physicians and society. With narrative competence, physicians can reach and join their patients in illness, recognize their own personal journeys through medicine, acknowledge kinship with and duties toward other health care professionals, and inaugurate consequential discourse with the public about health care. By bridging the divides that separate physicians from patients, themselves, colleagues, and society, narrative medicine offers fresh opportunities for respectful, empathic, and nourishing medical care.

Charon, Rita. JAMA (2001). Articles>Scientific Communication>Biomedical

Use of Race and Ethnicity in Biomedical Publication

Researchers, clinicians, and policy makers face 3 challenges in writing about race and ethnicity: accounting for the limitations of race/ethnicity data; distinguishing between race/ethnicity as a risk factor or as a risk marker; and finding a way to write about race/ethnicity that does not stigmatize and does not imply a we/they dichotomy between health professionals and populations of color. Josurnals play an important role in setting standards for research and policy literature. The authors outline guidelines that might be used when race and ethnicity are addressed in biomedical publications.

Kaplan, Judith B. and Trude Bennett. JAMA (2003). Articles>Scientific Communication>Biomedical>Ethnicity