Pleasing both authors and readers
- 3 April 1999
- Vol. 318 (7188) , 888-889
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7188.888
Abstract
Papers pp 897-914 To succeed, journals need to please both authors and readers. There is, however, a tension between the needs of the two, particularly when the authors are mostly researchers and the readers mostly practitioners. Practitioners like research articles to be short and sweet, whereas researchers want—rightly—to include enough material for critical readers (often other researchers) to be able to appraise the study and if necessary repeat it and also, increasingly, to be able to include it in a systematic review. Journals have struggled with this tension for years, and often the result is that we please nobody. Research among readers consistently shows that research articles are not well read, while many studies have shown that essential data are often missing from research reports. Now the electronic revolution offers us a chance to please both readers and authors simultaneously. Today's BMJ includes four papers where a short version is published in the paper journal and a …Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Twins and maternal smoking: ordeals for the fetal origins hypothesis? A cohort studyBMJ, 1999
- Multicentre randomised controlled trial of nursing intervention for breathlessness in patients with lung cancerBMJ, 1999
- Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statisticsBMJ, 1999
- Narrowing social inequalities in health? Analysis of trends in mortality among babies of lone mothersBMJ, 1999
- The BMJ's website scales upBMJ, 1998
- Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled TrialsJAMA, 1996
- Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statementJAMA, 1996