四项有助于改进医学研究文献的建议。
Four Proposals to Help Improve the Medical Research Literature.
作者信息
Moher David, Altman Douglas G
机构信息
Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
出版信息
PLoS Med. 2015 Sep 22;12(9):e1001864. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001864. eCollection 2015 Sep.
Abstract
David Moher and Douglas Altman outline four potential interventions that may improve the quality of peer-reviewed medical research publications.
摘要
大卫·莫赫和道格拉斯·阿尔特曼概述了四种可能提高同行评审医学研究出版物质量的潜在干预措施。
相似文献
1
Four Proposals to Help Improve the Medical Research Literature.
PLoS Med. 2015 Sep 22;12(9):e1001864. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001864. eCollection 2015 Sep.
2
The peer review process (aka peer reviewology).
Biol Res Nurs. 2002 Oct;4(2):71-2. doi: 10.1177/1099800402238328.
3
It Is Time to Re-Evaluate the Peer Review Process for Preclinical Research.
Bioessays. 2018 Jan;40(1). doi: 10.1002/bies.201700185. Epub 2017 Dec 11.
4
Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system.
BMC Med. 2014 Sep 26;12:179. doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0179-1.
5
Taking a peek into the editor's office.
Nat Cell Biol. 2018 Oct;20(10):1101. doi: 10.1038/s41556-018-0212-2.
6
Data publishing and scientific journals: the future of the scientific paper in a world of shared data.
Neuroinformatics. 2010 Oct;8(3):151-3. doi: 10.1007/s12021-010-9084-8.
7
The importance of being earnest in post-publication review: scientific fraud and the scourges of anonymity and excuses.
Oncogene. 2018 Feb 8;37(6):695-696. doi: 10.1038/onc.2017.390. Epub 2017 Oct 16.
8
Journals should set a new standard in transparency.
Nature. 2007 Jan 25;445(7126):364. doi: 10.1038/445364a.
9
[Scientific reporting guidelines].
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2009 Nov 19;129(22):2340. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.09.1099.
10
Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2019 Apr;94(4):670-676. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2018.09.004. Epub 2019 Feb 20.
引用本文的文献
1
Adherence to CONSORT Guidelines and Reporting of the Determinants of External Validity in Clinical Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials: A Review of Trials Published in Four Major Journals between 2013 and 2015.
Curr Oncol. 2023 Feb 8;30(2):2061-2072. doi: 10.3390/curroncol30020160.
2
Evaluation of editors' abilities to predict the citation potential of research manuscripts submitted to : a cohort study.
BMJ. 2022 Dec 14;379:e073880. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-073880.
3
Tolerating bad health research: the continuing scandal.
Trials. 2022 Jun 2;23(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06415-5.
4
Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing.
Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2019 Feb;2(1):e1150. doi: 10.1002/cnr2.1150. Epub 2018 Dec 2.
5
Reporting guideline checklists are not quality evaluation forms: they are guidance for writing.
Health Sci Rep. 2020 May 3;3(2):e165. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.165. eCollection 2020 Jun.
6
Reporting quality and adherence of randomized controlled trials about statins and/or fibrates for diabetic retinopathy to the CONSORT checklist.
Trials. 2019 Dec 16;20(1):729. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3868-4.
7
Professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting: a systematic review.
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Jul 10;4:14. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0073-7. eCollection 2019.
8
A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.
BMC Med. 2019 Jun 20;17(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1347-0.
9
Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research.
BMJ Open. 2019 May 9;9(5):e026589. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026589.
10
The Third Cognitive Revolution: The consequences and possibilities for biomedical research.
EMBO Rep. 2019 Apr;20(4). doi: 10.15252/embr.201847647. Epub 2019 Mar 29.
本文引用的文献
1
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.
J Am Coll Dent. 2014 Summer;81(3):14-8.
2
Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement.
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jan 6;162(1):55-63. doi: 10.7326/M14-0697.
3
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 1;4(1):1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.
4
Discontinuation and non-publication of surgical randomised controlled trials: observational study.
BMJ. 2014 Dec 9;349:g6870. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g6870.
5
Journals unite for reproducibility.
Nature. 2014 Nov 6;515(7525):7. doi: 10.1038/515007a.
6
The statistical reporting quality of articles published in 2010 in five dental journals.
Acta Odontol Scand. 2015 Jan;73(1):76-80. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2014.954612. Epub 2014 Nov 6.
7
The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative: innovation through collaboration.
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2014 Nov;13(11):797-8. doi: 10.1038/nrd4442.
8
Along with the privilege of authorship come important responsibilities.
BMC Med. 2014 Oct 24;12:214. doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0214-2.
9
Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials.
BMC Med. 2014 Jul 30;12:128. doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0128-z.
10
Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study.
BMJ. 2014 Jul 1;349:g4145. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g4145.
Zotero 插件