• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Readability in the British Journal of Surgery.

作者信息

Hayden J D

机构信息

Department of Surgery, D Floor, Clarendon Wing, The General Infirmary at Leeds, Leeds LS1 3EX, UK.

出版信息

Br J Surg. 2008 Jan;95(1):119-24. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5994.

DOI:10.1002/bjs.5994
PMID:18076017
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Readability scores predict the ease with which a document can be read and understood. Identification of the factors that affect readability might improve the quality of surgical literature.

METHODS

Electronic copies of submitted, peer reviewed and edited manuscripts of 189 articles published in the British Journal of Surgery from March 2006 to April 2007 were studied. Flesch reading ease scores were calculated for each version. Type of article (meta-analysis, review, randomized trial or other original paper), first language of principal author, number of peer revisions and editor were recorded.

RESULTS

Flesch score varied according to type of article (P = 0.004). The mean readability score was lower when English was the first language of the principal author (P = 0.016). There was no significant difference in mean Flesch score between the submitted and accepted (peer reviewed) manuscripts, but a significant increase occurred after editing (P < 0.001), which did not vary between editors.

CONCLUSION

Several factors influence readability. Knowledge of such factors might help authors to improve their scientific writing.

摘要

相似文献

1
Readability in the British Journal of Surgery.
Br J Surg. 2008 Jan;95(1):119-24. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5994.
2
The readability of original articles in surgical journals.外科期刊中原发性文章的可读性。
ANZ J Surg. 2006 Jan-Feb;76(1-2):68-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2006.03651.x.
3
Effects of peer review and editing on the readability of articles published in Annals of Internal Medicine.同行评审和编辑对发表于《内科学年鉴》上文章可读性的影响。
JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):119-21.
4
How does the peer review process influence AANA journal article readability?
AANA J. 1996 Feb;64(1):65-8.
5
Understanding Plain English summaries. A comparison of two approaches to improve the quality of Plain English summaries in research reports.理解简明英语摘要。两种提高研究报告中简明英语摘要质量方法的比较。
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Oct 9;3:17. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0064-0. eCollection 2017.
6
Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.《埃塞俄比亚医学杂志》的同行评审与编辑流程:对投稿稿件状态的十年评估
Ethiop Med J. 2013 Apr;51(2):95-103.
7
Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde.读者对同行评审和编辑对《荷兰医学杂志》文章质量影响的评价。
Lancet. 1996 Nov 30;348(9040):1480-3. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)05016-7.
8
What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.在《印度儿科学》上提交的内容与被接受的内容:投稿分析、评审过程、决策制定及退稿标准
Indian Pediatr. 2006 Jun;43(6):479-89.
9
What happens to medical articles submitted in Spanish that are not accepted for publication?被拒稿的西班牙语医学文章会怎样?
Neurologia. 2013 May;28(4):205-11. doi: 10.1016/j.nrl.2012.05.002. Epub 2012 Jul 12.
10
Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study.盲审与非盲审同行评议皮肤科杂志投稿:一项随机多评估者研究。
Br J Dermatol. 2011 Sep;165(3):563-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10432.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Readability of the 100 Most-Cited Neuroimaging Papers Assessed by Common Readability Formulae.采用通用可读性公式评估100篇被引次数最多的神经影像学论文的可读性。
Front Hum Neurosci. 2018 Aug 14;12:308. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00308. eCollection 2018.
2
The check-up before publication: once the peer-review process has been completed, scientific texts are revised one final time by the editors to make them easier to read and to understand.出版前检查:一旦同行评审过程完成,科学文本会由编辑进行最后一次修订,以使它们更易于阅读和理解。
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008 Dec;105(51-52):897-9. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0897. Epub 2008 Dec 22.