A recent study finds that academic press offices exaggerate claims in their press releases about published research. Worse, the vast majority of these find their way into subsequent reporting.
Journal redesigns seem to be occurring more frequently — and are certainly more complex — than in the past. What motivates a publisher and editor to undertake a redesign? And why is it so complex, costly, and strategic today?
Why does PubMed preferentially link to PMC versions in its search result lists? Emails from 2011 suggest it’s specifically to generate more traffic to PMC and show off NLM services.
Fewer than half of NIH sponsored clinical trials are published within 30 months, and 4 out of 5 FDA trials fail to publicly register results (as mandated by law), studies published in the BMJ report. Authors and sponsors may be the strongest source of reporting bias.
The prevalence of ghost authorship in the medical literature may be in decline, a new study reports. Is the issue really social or is authorship partly a problem of definition?
Article reprints can be a considerable source of income for some medical journals and there is some worry that this source of income presents a conflict of interest for publishers.
Business models for publishers fall into four broad categories, defined by how revenue is generated. Some classes of content lend themselves to one model over another.
Now that the vaccine-autism link has been shown to be based on a fraud, will ego continue to trump humility in the face of evidence?
Do the benefits of open peer-review outweigh the costs? A BMJ study argues “yes,” but there are caveats.
Another scandal rocks medical journal publishing. It’s time to stop pretending journals can salvage this on their own. It’s time to bring modern solutions to bear.
A write-up of a presentation at Charleston, here’s one way to parse trust in academic publishing.
BMJ Open is marketed as high-volume journal of rejects. Did BMJ miss on marketing or is this the future of open access publishing?
Improving participation in peer-review may be a matter of finding the right combination of incentives.
The willingness of industry to sponsor open access articles may bias your access to reliable health information.
Do medical editors have different quality standards based on the author’s geographic location?