PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (96960)

Clipboard (0)
None

Related Articles

1.  Guidelines for Preparation of a Scientific Paper 
Even the experienced scientific writer may have difficulty transferring research results to clear, concise, publishable words. To assist the beginning scientific writer, guidelines are proposed that will provide direction for determining a topic, developing protocols, collecting data, using computers for analysis and word processing, incorporating copyediting notations, consulting scientific writing manuals, and developing sound writing habits. Guidelines for writing each section of a research paper are described to help the writer prepare the title page, introduction, materials and methods, results, and discussion sections of the paper, as well as the acknowledgments and references. Procedures for writing the first draft and subsequent revisions include a checklist of structural and stylistic problems and common errors in English usage.
PMCID: PMC2625686  PMID: 3339646
2.  The Utility of Writing Assignments in Undergraduate Bioscience 
CBE Life Sciences Education  2012;11(1):39-46.
We tested the hypothesis that engagement in a few, brief writing assignments in a nonmajors science course can improve student ability to convey critical thought about science. A sample of three papers written by students (n = 30) was coded for presence and accuracy of elements related to scientific writing. Scores for different aspects of scientific writing were significantly correlated, suggesting that students recognized relationships between components of scientific thought. We found that students' ability to write about science topics and state conclusions based on data improved over the course of three writing assignments, while the abilities to state a hypothesis and draw clear connections between human activities and environmental impacts did not improve. Three writing assignments generated significant change in student ability to write scientifically, although our results suggest that three is an insufficient number to generate complete development of scientific writing skills.
doi:10.1187/cbe.11-07-0058
PMCID: PMC3292072  PMID: 22383616
3.  A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal 
Good alternatives to the Impact Factor (IF) algorithm are needed. The Thomson IF represents a limited measure of the importance of an individual article because 80% of a journal's IF is determined by only the 20% of the papers published. In the past few years, several new indexes has been created to provide alternatives to the IF algorithm. These include the removal of self citations from the calculation of the IF using the Adjusted IF, Index Copernicus initiative and other modifications such as the Cited Half-Life IF, Median IF, Disciplinary IF, and Prestige Factor. There is also the Euro-Factor, born in Europe to avoid the strong US centrality, and the English language basis of the Thomson database. One possible strategy to avoid "IF supremacy" is to create a new index, the Single Researcher Impact Factor (SRIF), that would move the evaluation from the power of scientific journals to the quality of single researchers. This measure can take into account the number and quality of the traditional publications and other activities usually associated with being a researcher, such as reviewing manuscripts, writing books, and attending scientific meetings. Also, in funding policy, it might be more useful to consider the merits, contributions, and real impact of all the scientific activities of a single researcher instead of adding only the journals' IF numbers. The major aim of this paper is to propose and describe the SRIF index that could represent a novel option to evaluate scientific research and researchers.
doi:10.2174/1745017901006010109
PMCID: PMC3040994  PMID: 21339895
Impact Factor; Scientific Journal; Single Researcher; Scientific Evaluation.
4.  Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials 
PLoS Medicine  2007;4(1):e19.
Background
Ghost authorship, the failure to name, as an author, an individual who has made substantial contributions to an article, may result in lack of accountability. The prevalence and nature of ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials is not known.
Methods and Findings
We conducted a cohort study comparing protocols and corresponding publications for industry-initiated trials approved by the Scientific-Ethical Committees for Copenhagen and Frederiksberg in 1994–1995. We defined ghost authorship as present if individuals who wrote the trial protocol, performed the statistical analyses, or wrote the manuscript, were not listed as authors of the publication, or as members of a study group or writing committee, or in an acknowledgment. We identified 44 industry-initiated trials. We did not find any trial protocol or publication that stated explicitly that the clinical study report or the manuscript was to be written or was written by the clinical investigators, and none of the protocols stated that clinical investigators were to be involved with data analysis. We found evidence of ghost authorship for 33 trials (75%; 95% confidence interval 60%–87%). The prevalence of ghost authorship was increased to 91% (40 of 44 articles; 95% confidence interval 78%–98%) when we included cases where a person qualifying for authorship was acknowledged rather than appearing as an author. In 31 trials, the ghost authors we identified were statisticians. It is likely that we have overlooked some ghost authors, as we had very limited information to identify the possible omission of other individuals who would have qualified as authors.
Conclusions
Ghost authorship in industry-initiated trials is very common. Its prevalence could be considerably reduced, and transparency improved, if existing guidelines were followed, and if protocols were publicly available.
Of 44 industry-initiated trials, there was evidence of ghost authorship in 33, increasing to 40 when a person qualifying for authorship was acknowledged rather than appearing as an author.
Editors' Summary
Background.
Original scientific findings are usually published in the form of a “paper”, whether it is actually distributed on paper, or circulated via the internet, as this one is. Papers are normally prepared by a group of researchers who did the research and are then listed at the top of the article. These authors therefore take responsibility for the integrity of the results and interpretation of them. However, many people are worried that sometimes the author list on the paper does not tell the true story of who was involved. In particular, for clinical research, case histories and previous research has suggested that “ghost authorship” is commonplace. Ghost authors are people who were involved in some way in the research study, or writing the paper, but who have been left off the final author list. This might happen because the study “looks” more credible if the true authors (for example, company employees or freelance medical writers) are not revealed. This practice might hide competing interests that readers should be aware of, and has therefore been condemned by academics, groups of editors, and some pharmaceutical companies.
Why Was This Study Done?
This group of researchers wanted to get an idea of how often ghost authorship happened in medical research done by companies. Previous studies looking into this used surveys, whereby the researchers would write to one author on each of a group of papers to ask whether anyone else had been involved in the work but who was not listed on the paper. These sorts of studies typically underestimate the rate of ghost authorship, because the main author might not want to admit what had been going on. However, the researchers here managed to get access to trial protocols (documents setting out the plans for future research studies), which gave them a way to investigate ghost authorship.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
In order to investigate the frequency and type of ghost authorship, these researchers identified every trial which was approved between 1994 and 1995 by the ethics committees of Copenhagen and Frederiksberg in Denmark. Then they winnowed this group down to include only the trials that were sponsored by industry (pharmaceutical companies and others), and only those trials that were finished and published. The protocols for each trial were obtained from the ethics committees and the researchers then matched up each protocol with its corresponding paper. Then, they compared names which appeared in the protocol against names appearing on the eventual paper, either on the author list or acknowledged elsewhere in the paper as being involved. The researchers ended up studying 44 trials. For 31 of these (75% of them) they found some evidence of ghost authorship, in that people were identified as having written the protocol or who had been involved in doing statistical analyses or writing the manuscript, but did not end up listed in the manuscript. If the definition of authorship was made narrower, and “ghost authorship” included people qualifying for authorship who were mentioned in the acknowledgements but not the author list, the researchers' estimate went up to 91%, that is 40 of the 44 trials. For most of the trials with missing authors, the ghost was a statistician (the person who analyzes the trial data).
What Do These Findings Mean?
In this study, the researchers found that ghost authorship was very common in papers published in medical journals (this study covered a broad range of peer-reviewed journals in many medical disciplines). The method used in this paper seems more reliable than using surveys to work out how often ghost authorship happens. The researchers aimed to define authorship using the policies set out by a group called the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the findings here suggest that the ICMJE's standards for authorship are very often ignored. This means that people who read the published paper cannot always accurately judge or trust the information presented within it, and competing interests may be hidden. The researchers here suggest that protocols should be made publicly available so that everyone can see what trials are planned and who is involved in conducting them. The findings also suggest that journals should not only list the authors of each paper but describe what each author has done, so that the published information accurately reflects what has been carried out.
Additional Information.
Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040019.
Read the Perspective by Liz Wager, which discusses these findings in more depth
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) is a group of general medical journal editors who have produced general guidelines for biomedical manuscripts; their definition of authorship is also described
The Committee on Publication Ethics is a forum for editors of peer-reviewed journals to discuss issues related to the integrity of the scientific record; the Web site lists anonymized problems and the committee's advice, not just regarding authorship, but other types of problems as well
Good Publication Practice for Pharmaceutical Companies outlines common standards for publication of industry-sponsored medical research, and some pharmaceutical companies have agreed to these
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040019
PMCID: PMC1769411  PMID: 17227134
5.  How to Write Articles that Get Published 
Publications are essential for sharing knowledge, and career advancement. Writing a research paper is a challenge. Most graduate programmes in medicine do not offer hands-on training in writing and publishing in scientific journals. Beginners find the art and science of scientific writing a daunting task. ‘How to write a scientific paper?, Is there a sure way to successful publication ?’ are the frequently asked questions. This paper aims to answer these questions and guide a beginner through the process of planning, writing, and correction of manuscripts that attract the readers and satisfies the peer reviewers. A well-structured paper in lucid and correct language that is easy to read and edit, and strictly follows the instruction to the authors from the editors finds favour from the readers and avoids outright rejection. Making right choice of journal is a decision critical to acceptance. Perseverance through the peer review process is the road to successful publication.
doi:10.7860/JCDR/2014/8107.4855
PMCID: PMC4225960  PMID: 25386508
Medical writing; Publication in biomedical journal; Preparation of manuscript
6.  English use among older bilingual immigrants in linguistically concentrated neighborhoods: Social proficiency and internal speech as intracultural variation 
This research focuses on patterns of English proficiency and use-of-English among older immigrants living in linguistically concentrated, ethnic neighborhoods. A sample (n=60) of older Puerto Ricans, who moved from the island to the mainland in their twenties, were divided into English proficiency groups (fluent, high intermediate, low intermediate) via the Adult Language Assessment Scales. Participants then provided self-ratings of their English proficiency (understanding, speaking, reading, and writing), their use of English in social domains (language spoken with own-family, in-laws, spouse, children, neighbors, and workmates), and their use of English in private psychological domains (language of talking to oneself, counting, writing notes to oneself, thinking, dreaming, praying, and expressing feelings). Finally, all participants completed the Puerto Rican Bicultural Scale. Results show a cohort of immigrant elders whose first language is protected by their ethnic neighborhoods but whose domestic and private lives are increasingly permeated by English. In particular, children emerge as powerful forces of language socialization in English for their parents. Further, there are important individual differences by level of proficiency, with a lowest proficiency group that is less acculturated, lower in socioeconomic status, and even more linguistically isolated than groups with higher proficiency. In essence, level of second language proficiency is a potent source of intracultural variation. Methodologically, the paper makes the important point that self-rated patterns of language use are consistent with scores on formal measures of proficiency. The paper also provides empirical verification of the logic of dividing language use into external, social speech and internal, psychological speech.
doi:10.1007/s10823-009-9091-0
PMCID: PMC3733010  PMID: 19184621
English proficiency; intracultural variation; older immigrants; Puerto Ricans
7.  A Guide for Writing in the Scientific Forum 
Plastic and reconstructive surgery  2010;126(5):1763-1771.
Background
When considering the importance of scientific writing in disseminating new discoveries and ideas, it is quite remarkable that few physicians have received any formal instruction in this essential process.
Methods
This paper focuses on the fundamental principles of scientific writing that also include a “style and grace” component.
Results
The art of good scientific writing is to convey scientific materials in a clear and interesting way, while avoiding incomprehensible sentences that only serve to disguise marginal contents within the article.
Conclusions
The goal of this paper is to encourage authors and readers to critically examine the art of scientific writing to overcome the barrier to effective communication.
doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ef8074
PMCID: PMC3052777  PMID: 21042135
Scientific writing; style; guide
8.  Text-Based Plagiarism in Scientific Writing: What Chinese Supervisors Think About Copying and How to Reduce it in Students’ Writing 
Science and Engineering Ethics  2012;19(2):569-583.
Text-based plagiarism, or textual copying, typically in the form of replicating or patchwriting sentences in a row from sources, seems to be an issue of growing concern among scientific journal editors. Editors have emphasized that senior authors (typically supervisors of science students) should take the responsibility for educating novices against text-based plagiarism. To address a research gap in the literature as to how scientist supervisors perceive the issue of textual copying and what they do in educating their students, this paper reports an interview study with 14 supervisors at a research-oriented Chinese university. The study throws light on the potentiality of senior authors mentoring novices in English as an Additional Language (EAL) contexts and has implications for the efforts that can be made in the wider scientific community to support scientists in writing against text-based plagiarism.
doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9342-7
PMCID: PMC3662859  PMID: 22212356
Text-based plagiarism; Textual borrowing; Supervisors; Writing for publication; Chinese scientists
9.  Examining the Medical Blogosphere: An Online Survey of Medical Bloggers 
Background
Blogs are the major contributors to the large increase of new websites created each year. Most blogs allow readers to leave comments and, in this way, generate both conversation and encourage collaboration. Despite their popularity, however, little is known about blogs or their creators.
Objectives
To contribute to a better understanding of the medical blogosphere by investigating the characteristics of medical bloggers and their blogs, including bloggers’ Internet and blogging habits, their motivations for blogging, and whether or not they follow practices associated with journalism.
Methods
We approached 197 medical bloggers of English-language medical blogs which provided direct contact information, with posts published within the past month. The survey included 37 items designed to evaluate data about Internet and blogging habits, blog characteristics, blogging motivations, and, finally, the demographic data of bloggers.
Pearson’s Chi-Square test was used to assess the significance of an association between 2 categorical variables. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was utilized to reveal the relationship between participants’ ages, as well as the number of maintained blogs, and their motivation for blogging. The Mann-Whitney U test was employed to reveal relationships between practices associated with journalism and participants’ characteristics like gender and pseudonym use.
Results
A total of 80 (42%) of 197 eligible participants responded. The majority of responding bloggers were white (75%), highly educated (71% with a Masters degree or doctorate), male (59%), residents of the United States (72%), between the ages of 30 and 49 (58%), and working in the healthcare industry (67%). Most of them were experienced bloggers, with 23% (18/80) blogging for 4 or more years, 38% (30/80) for 2 or 3 years, 32% (26/80) for about a year, and only 7% (6/80) for 6 months or less. Those who received attention from the news media numbered 66% (53/80). When it comes to best practices associated with journalism, the participants most frequently reported including links to original source of material and spending extra time verifying facts, while rarely seeking permission to post copyrighted material. Bloggers who have published a scientific paper were more likely to quote other people or media than those who have never published such a paper (U= 506.5, n1= 41, n2= 35, P= .016). Those blogging under their real name more often included links to original sources than those writing under a pseudonym (U= 446.5, n1= 58, n2= 19, P= .01). Major motivations for blogging were sharing practical knowledge or skills with others, influencing the way others think, and expressing oneself creatively.
Conclusions
Medical bloggers are highly educated and devoted blog writers, faithful to their sources and readers. Sharing practical knowledge and skills, as well as influencing the way other people think, were major motivations for blogging among our medical bloggers. Medical blogs are frequently picked up by mainstream media; thus, blogs are an important vehicle to influence medical and health policy.
doi:10.2196/jmir.1118
PMCID: PMC2626433  PMID: 18812312
Blog; journalism, medical; authorship; Internet; questionnaires; electronic publishing; medicine; podcast
10.  Publication Ethics and the Emerging Scientific Workforce: Understanding ‘Plagiarism’ in a Global Context 
Scientific publication has long been dominated by the English language and is rapidly moving towards near complete hegemony of English, while the majority of the world’s publishing scientists are not native English speakers. This imbalance has important implications for training in and enforcement of publication ethics, particularly with respect to plagiarism. A lack of understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and the use of a linguistic support strategy known as patchwriting can lead to inadvertent misuse of source material by non-native speakers writing in English as well as to unfounded accusations of intentional scientific misconduct on the part of these authors. A rational and well-informed dialogue about this issue is needed among both native English speaking and non-native English speaking writers, editors, educators, and administrators. Recommendations for educating and training are provided.
doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31823aadc7
PMCID: PMC3869232  PMID: 22104051
11.  Outcomes of a mentored research competition for authoring pediatric case reports in chiropractic 
Objective
A chiropractic pediatric specialist often encounters novel clinical findings not reported currently in the literature. This project matched board certified chiropractic pediatric specialists with a mentor experienced in scientific writing to co-author a research paper to add to the literature base available on chiropractic pediatric practice.
Methods
Clinicians who had received their Diplomate in Clinical Chiropractic Pediatrics and mentors in scientific writing were teamed up. Two surveys were conducted to collect quantitative data, and focus groups were held to gather qualitative data about the overall experience of the mentor and mentee (clinicians) participating in the study. The first survey was sent to the clinicians to gather information about their research idea and their experience in research. The second survey was conducted upon project completion by clinicians and mentors. A project wiki was used as a communication strategy.
Results
Ten reports were submitted by authorship teams. Time spent on this project was an average of 58 hours by clinicians and 36 hours by the mentors. Mentors aided by adding content material, editing manuscripts, and educating the clinicians in the art of writing a paper. Improvements for this project included clearer mentoring guidelines and not using the wiki as a communication venue.
Conclusion
The project ultimately fulfilled the goal of using a mentorship model to facilitate scientific writing education and ease the anxiety of authoring a first publication. The overall experience was “good”; however, there are opportunities for improvement.
doi:10.7899/JCE-12-008
PMCID: PMC3604962  PMID: 23519131
Authorship; Case Reports; Chiropractic; Mentors, Education; Pediatrics
12.  A Guide to Writing a Scientific Paper: A Focus on High School Through Graduate Level Student Research 
Zebrafish  2012;9(4):246-249.
Abstract
This article presents a detailed guide for high school through graduate level instructors that leads students to write effective and well-organized scientific papers. Interesting research emerges from the ability to ask questions, define problems, design experiments, analyze and interpret data, and make critical connections. This process is incomplete, unless new results are communicated to others because science fundamentally requires peer review and criticism to validate or discard proposed new knowledge. Thus, a concise and clearly written research paper is a critical step in the scientific process and is important for young researchers as they are mastering how to express scientific concepts and understanding. Moreover, learning to write a research paper provides a tool to improve science literacy as indicated in the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards (1996), and A Framework for K–12 Science Education (2011), the underlying foundation for the Next Generation Science Standards currently being developed. Background information explains the importance of peer review and communicating results, along with details of each critical component, the Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Specific steps essential to helping students write clear and coherent research papers that follow a logical format, use effective communication, and develop scientific inquiry are described.
doi:10.1089/zeb.2012.0743
PMCID: PMC3528086  PMID: 23094692
13.  Optimizing Scholarly Communication: 30 Tips for Writing Clearly 
Journal of Athletic Training  1996;31(3):209-213.
Objective:
To share with potential authors tips for communicating their ideas more clearly in a scholarly manuscript.
Description:
Communicating scientific, technical, or medical information so that readers can understand its meaning requires logical organization and proper use of language. These 30 tips review basic English grammar and suggest ways authors can clearly and concisely present their material. We admonish authors to avoid common errors such as writing in the passive voice, overusing abbreviations, and emphasizing unimportant facts.
Conclusion:
Attention to matters of writing style enhances clear communication, which must be the prime objective of scientific writing.
PMCID: PMC1318505  PMID: 16558400
14.  Incorporating Scientific Publishing into an Undergraduate Neuroscience Course: A Case Study Using IMPULSE 
The journal IMPULSE offers undergraduates worldwide the opportunity to publish research and serve as peer reviewers for the submissions of others. Undergraduate faculty have recognized the journal’s value in engaging students working in their labs in the publication process. However, integration of scientific publication into an undergraduate laboratory classroom setting has been lacking. We report here on a course at Ursinus College where 20 students taking Molecular Neurobiology were required to submit manuscripts to IMPULSE. The syllabus allowed for the laboratory research to coincide with the background research and writing of the manuscript. Students completed their projects on the impact of drugs on the Daphnia magna nervous system while producing manuscripts ready for submission by week 7 of the course. Findings from a survey completed by the students and perceptions of the faculty member teaching the course indicated that students spent much more time writing, were more focused on completing the assays, completed the assays with larger data sets, were more engaged in learning the scientific concepts and were more thorough with their revisions of the paper knowing that it might be published. Further, the professor found she was more thorough in critiquing students’ papers knowing they would be externally reviewed. Incorporating journal submission into the course stimulated an in depth writing experience and allowed for a deeper exploration of the topic than students would have experienced otherwise. This case study provides evidence that IMPULSE can be successfully used as a means of incorporating scientific publication into an undergraduate laboratory science course. This approach to teaching undergraduate neuroscience allows for a larger number of students to have hands-on research and scientific publishing experience than would be possible with the current model of a few students in a faculty member’s laboratory. This report illustrates that IMPULSE can be incorporated as an integral part of an academic curriculum with positive outcomes on student engagement and performance.
PMCID: PMC3592724  PMID: 23494013
teaching; writing; research; peer review
15.  Effects of a Research-Infused Botanical Curriculum on Undergraduates’ Content Knowledge, STEM Competencies, and Attitudes toward Plant Sciences 
CBE Life Sciences Education  2014;13(3):387-396.
This research-infused botanical curriculum increased students' knowledge and awareness of plant science topics, improved their scientific writing, and enhanced their statistical knowledge.
In response to the American Association for the Advancement of Science's Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education initiative, we infused authentic, plant-based research into majors’ courses at a public liberal arts university. Faculty members designed a financially sustainable pedagogical approach, utilizing vertically integrated curricular modules based on undergraduate researchers’ field and laboratory projects. Our goals were to 1) teach botanical concepts, from cells to ecosystems; 2) strengthen competencies in statistical analysis and scientific writing; 3) pique plant science interest; and 4) allow all undergraduates to contribute to genuine research. Our series of inquiry-centered exercises mitigated potential faculty barriers to adopting research-rich curricula, facilitating teaching/research balance by gathering publishable scholarly data during laboratory class periods. Student competencies were assessed with pre- and postcourse quizzes and rubric-graded papers, and attitudes were evaluated with pre- and postcourse surveys. Our revised curriculum increased students’ knowledge and awareness of plant science topics, improved scientific writing, enhanced statistical knowledge, and boosted interest in conducting research. More than 300 classroom students have participated in our program, and data generated from these modules’ assessment allowed faculty and students to present 28 contributed talks or posters and publish three papers in 4 yr. Future steps include analyzing the effects of repeated module exposure on student learning and creating a regional consortium to increase our project's pedagogical impact.
doi:10.1187/cbe.13-12-0231
PMCID: PMC4152201  PMID: 25185223
16.  Creation of a Graduate Oral/Written Communication Skills Course 
Objective
To convert a traditional graduate seminar course into a class that emphasizes written as well as oral communication skills.
Design
Graduate pharmacology/toxicology students presented formal and informal seminars on their research progress and on recent peer-reviewed literature from the field. Students in the audience wrote critiques of the research project or article, as well as of the presentations themselves.
Assessment
Students were evaluated based on oral presentations, class participation, and a scientific writing component. All faculty members provided constructive written comments and a grade. The course master provided the presenter with a formal written review and returned a “red pen” revision of each student critique.
Conclusion
This novel seminar/writing course introduces intensive focus on writing skills, which are especially essential today given the large number of graduate students for whom English is not a first language.
PMCID: PMC1636900  PMID: 17136148
research; seminar; communication skills; graduate education
17.  Plagiarism in Scientific Research and Publications and How to Prevent It 
Materia Socio-Medica  2014;26(2):141-146.
Quality is assessed on the basis of adequate evidence, while best results of the research are accomplished through scientific knowledge. Information contained in a scientific work must always be based on scientific evidence. Guidelines for genuine scientific research should be designed based on real results. Dynamic research and use correct methods of scientific work must originate from everyday practice and the fundamentals of the research. The original work should have the proper data sources with clearly defined research goals, methods of operation which are acceptable for questions included in the study. When selecting the methods it is necessary to obtain the consent of the patients/respondents to provide data for execution of the project or so called informed consent. Only by the own efforts can be reached true results, from which can be drawn conclusions and which finally can give a valid scholarly commentary. Text may be copied from other sources, either in whole or in part and marked as a result of the other studies. For high-quality scientific work necessary are expertise and relevant scientific literature, mostly taken from publications that are stored in biomedical databases. These are scientific, professional and review articles, case reports of disease in physician practices, but the knowledge can also be acquired on scientific and expert lectures by renowned scientists. Form of text publications must meet standards on writing a paper. If the article has already been published in a scientific journal, the same article cannot be published in any other journal with a few minor adjustments, or without specifying the parts of the first article which is used in another article. Copyright infringement occurs when the author of a new article, with or without mentioning the author, uses a substantial portion of previously published articles, including past contributions in the first article. With the permission of the publisher and the author, another journal can re-publish the article already published. In that case, that is not plagiarism, because the journal states that the article was re-published with the permission of the journal in which the article is primarily released. The original can be only one, and the copy is a copy, and plagiarism is stolen copy. The aim of combating plagiarism is to improve the quality, to achieve satisfactory results and to compare the results of their own research, rather than copying the data from the results of other people's research. Copy leads to incorrect results. Nowadays the problem of plagiarism has become huge, or widespread and present in almost all spheres of human activity, particularly in science.
Scientific institutions and universities should have a center for surveillance, security, promotion and development of quality research. Establishment of rules and respect the rules of good practice are the obligations of each research institutions, universities and every individual researchers, regardless of which area of science is being investigated. There are misunderstandings and doubts about the criteria and standards for when and how to declare someone a plagiarist. European and World Association of Science Editors (EASE and WAME), and COPE - Committee on Publishing Ethics working on the precise definition of that institution or that the scientific committee may sanction when someone is proven plagiarism and familiarize the authors with the types of sanctions. The practice is to inform the editors about discovered plagiarism and articles are withdrawn from the database, while the authors are put on the so-called black list. So far this is the only way of preventing plagiarism, because there are no other sanctions.
doi:10.5455/msm.2014.26.141-146
PMCID: PMC4035147  PMID: 24944543
scientific research; ethics; citing; plagiarism
18.  ABC's of Writing Medical Papers in English 
Korean Journal of Radiology  2012;13(Suppl 1):S1-S11.
Publishing medical papers in English is important as English remains the predominant language for most medical papers (both electronic and traditional journal publications). In addition, journals with the highest impact factors are published in English and a publication in English thus enhances the visibility of authors and their institutions, and is important for promotion in some academic centers. This article reviews the basic principles that will help you successfully publish a manuscript in English. Although other books and articles are available on this subject, there are relatively few references. The present article is based on this author's experience of publishing nearly 400 articles in English. It will emphasize writing original articles, but the principles can be applied to virtually any type of manuscript.
doi:10.3348/kjr.2012.13.S1.S1
PMCID: PMC3341452  PMID: 22563279
Publishing; Writing; Research design
19.  Knowing and Avoiding Plagiarism During Scientific Writing 
Plagiarism has become more common in both dental and medical communities. Most of the writers do not know that plagiarism is a serious problem. Plagiarism can range from simple dishonesty (minor copy paste/any discrepancy) to a more serious problem (major discrepancy/duplication of manuscript) when the authors do cut-copy-paste from the original source without giving adequate credit to the main source. When we search databases like PubMed/MedLine there is a lot of information regarding plagiarism. However, it is still a current topic of interest to all the researchers to know how to avoid plagiarism. It's time to every young researcher to know ethical guidelines while writing any scientific publications. By using one's own ideas, we can write the paper completely without looking at the original source. Specific words from the source can be added by using quotations and citing them which can help in not only supporting your work and amplifying ideas but also avoids plagiarism. It is compulsory to all the authors, reviewers and editors of all the scientific journals to know about the plagiarism and how to avoid it by following ethical guidelines and use of plagiarism detection software while scientific writing.
doi:10.4103/2141-9248.141957
PMCID: PMC4212376  PMID: 25364588
Plagiarism; Scientific writing; Unethical publication practice
20.  Principles and Ethics in Scientific Communication in Biomedicine 
Acta Informatica Medica  2013;21(4):228-233.
Introduction and aim:
To present the basic principles and standards of scientific communication and writing a paper, to indicate the importance of honesty and ethical approach to research and publication of results in scientific journals, as well as the need for continuing education in the principles and ethics in science and publication in biomedicine.
Methods:
An analysis of relevant materials and documents, sources from the internet and published literature and personal experience and observations of the author.
Results:
In the past more than 20 years there is an increasingly emphasized importance of respecting fundamental principles and standards of scientific communication and ethical approach to research and publication of results in peer review journals. Advances in the scientific community is based on honesty and equity of researchers in conducting and publishing the results of research and to develop guidelines and policies for prevention and punishment of publishing misconduct. Today scientific communication standards and definitions of fraud in science and publishing are generally consistent, but vary considerably policies and approach to ethics education in science, prevention and penal policies for misconduct in research and publication of results in scientific journals.
Conclusion:
It is necessary to further strengthen the capacity for education and research, and raising awareness about the importance and need for education about the principles of scientific communication, ethics of research and publication of results. The use of various forms of education of the scientific community, in undergraduate teaching and postgraduate master and doctoral studies, in order to create an ethical environment, is one of the most effective ways to prevent the emergence of scientific and publication dishonesty and fraud.
doi:10.5455/aim.2013.21.228-233
PMCID: PMC3905721  PMID: 24505166
scientific communication; principles; ethics; IMRAD structure; scientific fraud; plagiarism; ethics education.
21.  Culture in salutogenesis: the scholarship of Aaron Antonovsky 
Global Health Promotion  2014;21(4):16-23.
Aaron Antonovsky wrote extensively, although disjointedly, about the roles of culture in salutogenesis. This paper provides a synopsis of his work in this arena. A literature review identified those of his English language writings in which culture was a subject, and relevant text segments were analysed using an inductive followed by a deductive method. Using thematic network analysis, text segments were sorted inductively by open coding and then analysed. This was followed by deductive text segment coding guided by the constructs of the salutogenic model of health. The analysis revealed that Antonovsky had an expansive interest in the roles of culture in salutogenesis. His writings included attention to the role of culture in: (a) shaping life situations; (b) giving rise to stressors and resources; (c) contributing to life experiences of predictability, load balance and meaningful roles; (d) facilitating the development of the sense of coherence and (e) shaping perceptions of health and well-being. Antonovsky’s writings about culture were sometimes conjectural, as well as being obviously influenced by his life experience in the USA and then in Israel, and by the spirit of the times in which he lived. However, he also drew extensively on his own and others’ empiricism, leading him to view culture as an integral aspect of the salutogenic model of health. The present analysis provides salutogenesis scholars with a roadmap of Antonovsky’s reflections, ponderings and conclusions about culture in the context of salutogenesis. It provides assistance in the form of an overview of Antonovsky’s treatment of culture in the context of salutogenesis.
doi:10.1177/1757975914528550
PMCID: PMC4242901  PMID: 24814861
salutogenesis; culture; health promotion; Antonovsky
22.  Automatic Capture of Student Notes to Augment Mentor Feedback and Student Performance on Patient Write-Ups 
Objective
To determine whether the integration of an automated electronic clinical portfolio into clinical clerkships can improve the quality of feedback given to students on their patient write-ups and the quality of students’ write-ups.
Design
The authors conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled study of an electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects all students’ clinical notes and notifies their teachers (attending and resident physicians) via e-mail. Third-year medical students were randomized to use the electronic portfolio or traditional paper means. Teachers in the portfolio group provided feedback directly on the student’s write-up using a web-based application. Teachers in the control group provided feedback directly on the student’s write-up by writing in the margins of the paper. Outcomes were teacher and student assessment of the frequency and quality of feedback on write-ups, expert assessment of the quality of student write-ups at the end of the clerkship, and participant assessment of the value of the electronic portfolio system.
Results
Teachers reported giving more frequent and detailed feedback using the portfolio system (p = 0.01). Seventy percent of students who used the portfolio system, versus 39% of students in the control group (p = 0.001), reported receiving feedback on more than half of their write-ups. Write-ups of portfolio students were rated of similar quality to write-ups of control students. Teachers and students agreed that the system was a valuable teaching tool and easy to use.
Conclusions
An electronic clinical portfolio that automatically collects students’ clinical notes is associated with improved teacher feedback on write-ups and similar quality of write-ups.
doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0608-y
PMCID: PMC2517906  PMID: 18612728
portfolio; feedback; medical education
23.  The Importance of Proper Citation of References in Biomedical Articles 
Acta Informatica Medica  2013;21(3):148-155.
In scientific circles, the reference is the information that is necessary to the reader in identifying and finding used sources. The basic rule when listing the sources used is that references must be accurate, complete and should be consistently applied. On the other hand, quoting implies verbatim written or verbal repetition of parts of the text or words written by others that can be checked in original. Authors of every new scientific article need to explain how their study or research fits with previous one in the same or similar fields. A typical article in the health sciences refers to approximately 20-30 other articles published in peer reviewed journals, cite once or hundreds times. Citations typically appear in two formats: a) as in-text citations where the sources of information are briefly identified in the text; or b) in the reference list at the end of the publication (book chapter, manuscript, article, etc.) that provides full bibliographic information for each source.
Group of publishers met in Vancouver in 1978 and decided to prescribe uniform technical propositions for publication. Adopted in the 1979 by the National Library of Medicine in Bethesda, then the International Committee of Medical Journals Editors (ICMJE), whose review in 1982 entered the official application by 300 international biomedical journals. Authors writing articles for publication in biomedical publications used predominantly citation styles: Vancouver style, Harward style, PubMed style, ICMJE, APA, etc. The paper gives examples of all of these styles of citation to the authors in order to facilitate their applications. Also in this paper is given the review about the problem of plagiarism which becomes more common in the writing of scientific and technical articles in biomedicine.
doi:10.5455/aim.2013.21.148-155
PMCID: PMC3804522  PMID: 24167381
citing and quoting references; scientometrics; plagiarism.
24.  How do we handle self-plagiarism in submitted manuscripts? 
Biochemia Medica  2013;23(2):150-153.
Self-plagiarism is a controversial issue in scientific writing and presentation of research data. Unlike plagiarism, self-plagiarism is difficult to interpret as intellectual theft under the justification that one cannot steal from oneself. However, academics are concerned, as self-plagiarized papers mislead readers, do not contribute to science, and bring undeserved credit to authors. As such, it should be considered a form of scientific misconduct. In this paper, we explain different forms of self-plagiarism in scientific writing and then present good editorial policy toward questionable material. The importance of dealing with self-plagiarism is emphasized by the recently published proposal of Text Recycling Guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
doi:10.11613/BM.2013.019
PMCID: PMC3900061  PMID: 23894861
editorial policy; research integrity guidelines; self-plagiarism; text-recycling
25.  Narratives and Neurons: Stories of Damaged Brains 
Stories register in human memory in special ways, and stories about neurological cases can entertain and move a reader while simultaneously being an important part of any neuroscience curriculum. Here we describe a course taught in the context of the liberal arts curriculum of Baldwin-Wallace College. Students from a variety of disciplines learned basic neuroanatomy, neurophysiology and neurochemistry and then used this information to help them understand published neurological case studies, which were analyzed for their literary as well as scientific qualities. Later in the course, students were paired with a person with a neurological disorder and they investigated their cases in some depth. The capstone experience was a monograph that aimed to be both good science and good story telling. Narratives and Neurons was team taught by faculty from the Neuroscience and English departments. However, the case studies were shaped and improved by all the class participants using writing workshop methods common to creative writing classes. Assessments of this course were very favorable, suggesting that students find that the work enhanced their resourcefulness and challenged their abilities to critically evaluate and problem solve. Some of the cases have found their way into the peer-reviewed literature. Moreover, the interaction between students and individuals with neurological disorders provided a diversity of experiences that enriched the lives of all the participants.
PMCID: PMC3592716  PMID: 23493566
neurological case studies; stories; teaching methods; narratives; undergraduate neuroscience courses; inter-disciplinary courses; neuroscience education

Results 1-25 (96960)