共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 250 毫秒
1.
参照《期刊与学术会议摘要中报告随机对照试验的CONSORT声明》拟定的报告清单,审核了国内4种重要期刊2005—2008年随机对照试验(RCT)英文摘要的报道质量。利用PubMed共查到108篇RCT摘要。经审核报道最好的项目是目的和结论,试验状态、分组例数和干预次之。对RCT执行质量的关键信息描述最差:盲法、随机分组方法和数据分析例数的报道分别为0、1.9%和6.5%。结果表明,RCT摘要报道普遍不完整。建议医学期刊采纳《摘要CONSORT》,制订可行的模板以提高RCT摘要报道的完整性和有效性。 相似文献
2.
3.
对中文核心医药期刊官网中的生物医学研究伦理审查制度建设现状进行调查分析,为加强我国生物医学研究伦理审查制度建设提供参考.从《中文核心期刊要目总览(2017年版)》收录的255种医药期刊中随机选取100种中文核心医药期刊作为研究对象,登录这100种医药期刊官网,对生物医学研究伦理审查要求进行分析.结果 表明:在100种中文核心医药期刊官网中,稿约或投稿指南对生物医学研究伦理审查有要求的期刊51种,其中对临床试验伦理审查要求最多(49种期刊),对提供临床试验注册号要求最少(12种期刊);官网主页设置"医学伦理"栏目的 只有10种期刊,其中对临床试验伦理审查与动物实验伦理审查要求最多(9种期刊),只有3种期刊有上传生物医学研究伦理审查办法文件.有6种期刊在稿约对生物医学研究伦理学有要求的同时,在主页也设置了"医学伦理"栏目.可见,中文核心期刊官网对生物医学研究伦理审查不够重视,应进一步加强医学伦理审查制度的建设.科技期刊编辑部应与国际接轨,学习国际著名期刊的做法,更新办刊理念;利用好官网提供生物医学研究伦理学习资源,对作者进行医学伦理教育;应制定统一的生物医学研究伦理审查规范. 相似文献
4.
采用分层随机抽样的方法选择《科技期刊世界影响力指数报告》(2020版)中150种医药卫生期刊的稿约作为研究对象,分析其统计报告规范现状,并提出相应的稿约统计报告规范细则完善建议。研究发现,107种(71.33%)医学期刊在稿约中声明了统计报告规范审查的要求,不同语种、子学科分类、数据库收录医学期刊统计报告规范审查的要求差异较大。英文医学期刊统计报告规范意识较强,超过半数(55.05%)中文医学期刊统计报告规范意识有待提高;稿约统计报告规范表述笼统宽泛,操作和指导性不强;医学统计学名词和符号不规范,稿约细则表述不严谨。医学期刊应完善稿约细则,提高作者统计报告规范意识;规范统计学审核流程,强化编辑统计报告规范把关责任,这将有助于提高医学论文统计学内容质量。 相似文献
5.
中国的临床研究水平参差不齐,特别是随机对照研究,整体水平与国际研究差距较大,导致我国医学期刊的质量难以达到国外优秀期刊水平。本研究通过介绍CONSORT声明、分析CONSORT声明对提高医学期刊质量的意义,倡导医学期刊编辑了解CONSORT声明,关注CONSORT声明,在期刊编辑过程中应用CONSORT声明,从而达到最终提高期刊质量的目的。 相似文献
6.
本文分别从期刊撤稿规范和流程、对作者惩戒措施、研究报告透明度政策等方面深入揭示了国内外生物医学期刊伦理建设现状,并提出国内期刊抵制学术不端行为的防范措施。1)完善撤稿规范和流程,是防范学术不端行为的重要制度保证。2)制订惩戒措施,构建防范学术不端行为的防线。3)增加研究报告透明度,将“把控内容真实性”作为防范学术不端行为的根本:①提高数据、代码、材料透明度,增加对研究结果的信任;②制订图像完整性标准,避免不当操纵;③遵循临床试验报告指南,促进试验结果的完整和透明;④施行临床试验注册相关规范,提高社会公信度;⑤规范利益冲突披露形式,提高研究报告透明度。 相似文献
7.
医学期刊应重视临床试验注册 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
从20世纪70年代提出概念,临床试验注册已由零散的自发状态发展到由世界卫生组织临床试验注册平台统一领导、各国政府支持并在全球展开。国际医学编辑委员会所有的成员杂志及其他一些国际知名杂志共2000余种均要求临床试验注册后才考虑发表。我国也有46种杂志支持临床试验注册。医学期刊审查临床试验注册时应参照WHO临床试验注册最低要求20个条目。医学期刊应从编辑、作者、读者3个层次就医学期刊如何实施临床试验注册制度进行教育和培训,才能真正推进医学期刊执行临床试验注册制度。 相似文献
8.
9.
中医药期刊作为中医药研究成果传播和交流的重要平台,应该重视对中医药研究的伦理审查.本研究对中医药期刊的医学伦理审查情况进行调查,发现部分中医药期刊对伦理审查不够重视,对伦理审查的要求缺乏明确规范,由此提出以下建议:中医药期刊应加强对医学伦理的重视,可在稿约或投稿指南中补充对伦理审查的要求,而且应明确相应规范,同时可在伦... 相似文献
10.
医学期刊应重视对来稿的道德要求 总被引：4，自引：2，他引：2
比较国内外医学期刊对作者科研及投稿过程中有关道德方面的要求。发现国外医学期刊在稿约中对作者应遵守的道德法规规定得很详细，而国内期刊则较为简单，缺少很多必要的内容，与国外医学期刊存在相当大的差距。认为我国医学期刊应当重视科研及编辑出版中的道德问题。 相似文献
11.
临床实践指南(简称指南)和专家共识(简称共识)作为医疗实践的重要指导性文件,可以规范医务人员的诊疗行为,提升医疗服务质量、降低医疗成本,是医务人员进行决策的准则和依据。指南/共识的规范化报告有助于提升其学术质量、权威性和透明性,可以促进其有效传播与实施,因此提升指南/共识报告质量具有重要现实意义。本文分析了目前我国医学科技期刊指南/共识的报告现状及存在问题,并从出台相关政策、开展培训、宣传推广等方面提出相应建议与对策,以期为提升我国指南/共识报告质量提供思路,推进医学期刊高质量发展。 相似文献
12.
临床实践指南(简称指南)是由政府机构或学术组织撰写的指导性医疗文件,对提高医疗质量有重要的指导、推动作用,因此其制作的质量非常重要。目前我国指南制订者并不熟悉指南制订方法与报告规范;指南制订的透明性、科学性、完整性及严谨性不足;指南宣传推广不足。医学编辑在指南制订全过程中均可开展一些工作,提升指南质量。制订前普及、宣传指南制订的方法学与报告规范,选题策划时组织、邀约临床实用性高的指南。指南投稿中严格按照AGREEⅡ及RIGHT标准,逐项审查把关。制订后大力推广和宣传,促进指南在临床的实施。 相似文献
13.
14.
Takeo Nakayama Nobuko Hirai Shigeaki Yamazaki Mariko Naito 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2005,93(2):237-242
BACKGROUND: The use of a structured abstract has been recommended in reporting medical literature to quickly convey necessary information to editors and readers. The use of structured abstracts increased during the mid-1990s; however, recent practice has yet to be analyzed. OBJECTIVES: This article explored actual reporting patterns of abstracts recently published in selected medical journals and examined what these journals required of abstracts (structured or otherwise and, if structured, which format). METHODS: The top thirty journals according to impact factors noted in the "Medicine, General and Internal" category of the ISI Journal Citation Reports (2000) were sampled. Articles of original contributions published by each journal in January 2001 were examined. Cluster analysis was performed to classify the patterns of structured abstracts objectively. Journals' instructions to authors for writing an article abstract were also examined. RESULTS: Among 304 original articles that included abstracts, 188 (61.8%) had structured and 116 (38.2%) had unstructured abstracts. One hundred twenty-five (66.5%) of the abstracts used the introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) format, and 63 (33.5%) used the 8-heading format proposed by Haynes et al. Twenty-one journals requested structured abstracts in their instructions to authors; 8 journals requested the 8-heading format; and 1 journal requested it only for intervention studies. CONCLUSIONS: Even in recent years, not all abstracts of original articles are structured. The eight-heading format was neither commonly used in actual reporting patterns nor noted in journal instructions to authors. 相似文献
15.
A C Weller 《Bulletin of the Medical Library Association》1987,75(4):310-316
Many factors are weighed in judging the quality of a journal. Editorial policies in the instructions to authors section offer an important, though often neglected, source of information. In addition to directions on formatting and style, this section often includes financial disclosures and policies on coverage, peer review, confidentiality, human experimentation and duplicate submissions. This study analyzes the contents of instructions sections from several categories of medical journals to determine their usefulness in making collection development decisions. Included are journals currently considered the most prestigious, indexed in Index Medicus and Abridged Index Medicus, and not indexed in Index Medicus or subscribed to by a typical large academic health sciences library. It was found that in a statistically significant number of journals, the instructions to authors section is more likely to be included and substantive in highly regarded journals than in less prestigious journals. It is concluded that the amount of information in the instructions section is related to the quality of the journal and that these sections are a useful collection development tool. 相似文献
16.
17.
为了促进我国医学期刊编辑、作者及审稿专家对图表著作权问题的重视,通过调查医学期刊对论文中图表的合理使用和授权许可使用规定的现状,发现医学期刊存在对图表的著作权意识较薄弱,稿约和著作权协议中相关规定和要求表述不完善及不规范等现象。提出了医学期刊出版单位应提倡和尊重图表原创性,要求作者使用他人已发表的图表必须获得著作权许可,明确图表二次使用的合法使用范围,从而提高著作权意识,促进期刊论文图表的著作权保护。 相似文献
18.
19.
Tove Faber Frandsen 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(1):57-62
Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publication, and consequently, predatory journals are feared to be a threat to the credibility of science as they perform no or low‐quality peer review. The question of why researchers decide to publish in a questionable journal remains relatively unexplored. This paper provides an overview of the existing literature on why researchers decide to publish papers in questionable journals, specifically whether or not they search for a low‐barrier way to getting published while being aware that the chosen journal probably does not adhere to acceptable academic standards. The choice of a publication outlet can be seen as a submission tree that consists of various incentives, and explaining why authors publish in deceptive journals may thus consist of a combination of awareness and motivational factors. Awareness and motivation of diligent authors is very different from that of unethical authors. Unethical authors may use a lack of awareness to excuse their actions, but they may actively search for a low‐barrier way to getting published. As there are different types of authors who publish in deceptive journals, we need different approaches to solve the problem. 相似文献
20.
229 Chinese‐language biomedical journals from A Guide to The Core Journals of China were investigated for their guidance on 14 ethical issues. The issues of authorship, duplicate submission, privacy and confidentiality, and integrity of the data were mentioned in more than 50% of the journals. Except for the issues of authorship and protection of animals in research, significant differences were found between Chinese Medical Association Publishing House (CMAPH) journals (n = 67) and non‐CMAPH journals (n = 162) (P < 0.05). 66 of the 229 journals did not update their instructions for authors regularly. 196 journal instructions listed authorship criteria, while the other 33 did not. Clinical trial registration policy was required by 26 (11.3%) journals, among which the CONSORT statement for randomized trials was required by 23, and only one journal guided the authors to work in line with the EQUATOR Network. The study concludes that the situation of publishing ethics in the instructions for authors of Chinese biomedical journals is not favorable, and that Chinese biomedical editors should learn more about publishing ethics in order to reduce opportunities for publication problems. 相似文献