Thursday, January 25, 2007

How Web 2.0 is changing medicine

Editorials
BMJ 2006;333:1283-1284 (23 December)
doi:10.1136/bmj.39062.555405.80

Web 2.0 is a difficult term to define. What seems clear is that it brings people together in a more dynamic, interactive space. This new generation of internet services and devices—often referred to as social software—can be leveraged to enrich our web experience, as information is continually requested, consumed, and reinterpreted. Web 2.0 examples in medicine are given with useful links to test them

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7582/1283

Milestones on the long road to knowledge

Godlee F. 2007. Milestones on the long road to knowledge. BMJ
doi:10.1136/bmj.39062.570856.94


Seeking a way to mark the launch of the new BMJ, the editors hit on the idea of looking back at the most important medical milestones since the forerunner of the BMJ was first published in 1840. They asked readers to nominate milestones and then a panel of editors and advisers narrowed the field down from more than 70 to 15. They invited champions to write on each one; their contributions make up the commemorative supplement published on 20 January.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/334/suppl_1/s2

Monday, January 15, 2007

Analysis of the most highly cited articles from the 50-year history of CCA.

Csako G. 2007. Analysis of the most highly cited articles from the 50-year history of CCA. Clinica Chimica Acta. 375(1-2):43-48.

This article describes the analysis of the most highly cited articles from CCA’s history. Lists are all based on the ISI/Thomson Scientific database and the country of origin identified by a PubMed search. A significant positive correlation was found between the total number of citations and the date of publication of the cited articles, with the most highly cited articles appearing at least 8–16 years following their publication. It is concluded that these results may assist in editorial policy-making and marketing decisions and in assessing the impact of individual countries on the field, as well as guiding authors' decisions when in submitting articles.

http://www.sciencedirect.com

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

The future of Physics publishing

Physics World 2007. (20) 1
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world

Physicists need to keep abreast of the latest changes in science publishing.
The January issue of Physics World (Vol. 20, No.1, 2007) has three papers in its "Comment " section introducing an issue featuring developments in physics publishing, and also has a whole section entitled "The future of physics publishing" (p. 18-36). Here follow the individual entries:

[Editorial]. 2007. Brave new Web. Physics World. 29(1)13
Article introducing an issue featuring developments in physics publishiing and suggesting physicists are slow to use the new tools: 84% have no idea what social tagging is; only 14% have ever contributed to a work-related wiki etc.

Carroll S. 2007. Blogging for physics. Physics World 29(1)14
Explains how blogging can place scientific research in a wider context

Crease RP. 2007 Critical point: The lost art of the letter . Physics World 29(1)15
The Internet is affecting not only how scientists communicate, but also how furure science historians will work.

Chalmers M. 2007 A revolution in bits. Physics World 29(1)18-21
The Internet is transforming the way that physicists report their findings and communicate with one another. This article shows that we are only just beginning to harness the power of the Web. Its current use by physics journals, the effect of open-access, open peer review, blogs including Wikipedia, and possible future problems are all discussed.

Voss R. 2007. The open-access debate. Physics World 29(1)22
Paper making the case for open-access journals.

Enderby J. 2007 . The open-access debate. Physics World 29(1)23
Paper warning that open-acess publishing is an unproved business model and not in the best interests of science.

Griffiths, M R. 2007 Talking physics in the social Web. Physics World 29(1)24-28
From "blogs" to "wikis", the Web is now more than a mere repository of information. This paper investigates how this new interactivity is affecting the way physicists communicate and access information.

Cartlidge, E. 2007. Peer review steps out of the shadows. Physics World. 29(1)29-30
Some researchers believe that the Internet can be used to imporove the transparency and quality of the peer-review process, but as this paper discovers, "open peer review" has yet to catch on in the physics community.

Meho LI. 2007. The rise and rise of citation analysis. Physics World. 29(1)32-36
With the vast majority of scientific papers now available online, this paper describes how the Web is allowing physicists and information providers to measure more accurately the impact of these papers and their authors and ending the monopoly of Thomson Scientific (formerly ISI).

Posted for John Glen

Friday, January 05, 2007

Concentration of the Most-Cited Papers in the Scientific Literature

Ioannidis JPA. 2006. Concentration of the Most-Cited Papers in the Scientific Literature: Analysis of Journal Ecosystems. PLoS ONE. 2006; 1(1): e5. Published online 2006 December 20.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000005.

Despite a plethora of available journals, the most influential papers are extremely concentrated in few journals, especially in fields with high citation density. Existing multidisciplinary journals publish selectively most-cited papers from fields with high citation density. The paper reports and discusses on: journals publishing most-cited papers, diversity in specific fields, correlates of species (journal) diversity, concentration in multidisciplinary journals, original articles and reviews, extent of concentration of papers, citations, and most-cited papers.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1762344

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

EDITORIAL PROCESS

The PLoS Medicine Editors, Krishna S. 2006. Drug Development Papers in PLoS Medicine: How We Try to Spot a Winner. PLoS Med 3(12): e547
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030547

Editors ask several general questions about any submitted paper: how important is the research question (both globally and in relation to the journal's audience); what is the likelihood of the conclusions holding up over time (and when is it worth publishing preliminary results that would be important if confirmed but where confirmation is uncertain); and, for a highly selective general medical journal, do the results represent a substantial advance—be it in understanding pathogenesis, suggesting treatment options, or having implications for public health. The editors of PloS Medicine here discuss their strategy in deciding which drug development papers are appropriate for publication in a general medical journal.

http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0030547

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

ETHICAL ISSUES

Boyd EA, Bero LA. 2006. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests.
Health Res Policy Syst. 4: 16

The World Health Organization (WHO) has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. Literature on conflicts of interest was reviewed to search the best way to obtain complete and accurate disclosures on financial ties and other competing interests.
The paper considers how to manage conflict of interests and how to enforce appropriate policies.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1693552