logo BDSP

Base documentaire


Votre avis nous intéresse

Le réseau BDSP met en oeuvre un projet d'innovation et d'amélioration de ses services, dans le souci constant de proposer des contenus de qualité adaptés aux besoins des utilisateurs.

Identifier de nouvelles sources de financements est la condition nécessaire pour assurer la poursuite et la pérennité de cet outil unique qu'est la BDSP, tout en le faisant évoluer.

Pour définir un nouveau modèle économique, nous avons besoin de votre avis : merci de répondre à notre enquête (temps estimé : 5 minutes).

Participer maintenant
Participer plus tard J'ai déjà participé

  1. Changes to manuscripts during the editorial process : Characterizing the evolution of a clinical paper.

    Article, Communication - En anglais

    International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.

    Context.

    Biomedical manuscripts undergo substantive change as a result of the peer review and editorial revision processes.

    Objective

    To characterize quantitatively problems in manuscripts identified during peer review and changes made to address these problems.

    Design and Setting

    Descriptive analysis of manuscripts submitted to and articles published by the Annals of Intemal Medicine.

    A taxonomy of problems that occur in reporting clinical research was developed from analysis of changes made to 7 manuscripts between submission and publication (published October 15,1996, and November 1,1996).

    The taxonomy was used to characterize changes to 12 additional manuscripts (published January 15,1997, to April 1,1997).

    Main Outcome Measure

    Types of problems necessitating changes to manuscripts during peer review and revision.

    Results

    Changes occurred because of 5 types of problems : too much information, too little information, inaccurate information, misplaced information, and structural problems.

    Changes most often occurred because information was missing or extraneous.

    The distribution of changes seemed to be influenced by the type of information involved (such as background or conclusions).

    Conclusion

    The proposed framework may be useful for characterizing quantitatively the effects of peer review and for comparing those effects across editors, journals, and specialties.

    Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Changement, Cause, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Manuscrit

    Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Change, Cause, Human, Scientific literature

    Logo du centre Notice produite par :
    Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique

    Cote : 98-0444705

    Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.