ICMJE committee members recently published an editorial about how to recognize and avoid predatory or ‘pseudo’ scientific journals, co-hosted in the Annals of Internal Medicine and NEJM. Their top giveaways for a predatory journal were:
Put on your parenting hat next time you’re responding to peer review feedback for a scientific manuscript, and see if you get results!
On a quick glance, scientific writing by generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) can seem to be good. But if you look closely enough, you’ll notice some eerie content that emerges.
Publication extenders summarize key points from peer-reviewed publications to get bite-sized content to healthcare providers for easy and quick consumption. Let’s dive in!
AI is a new tool that can (and should) be leveraged to speed up some specific parts of the writing process that can be automated – saving time and mental bandwidth for the parts of the process that need idea generation and critical analysis. AI won’t do an expert job writing your manuscript for you 🙁
Agnella and Meg Bouvier discuss grant applications vs. manuscripts on a livestream.
What email newsletters should you read to stay on top of the medical communications field? #medcomms #publications #medicalwriting
The International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) just announced that the latest iteration of their Good Publication Practice document (GPP 2022) for industry-sponsored medical publications is available. Read on for what’s new and what’s changed in the latest guideline.
Most researchers are familiar with the “IMRaD” format for scientific publications (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion). Though this is the order in which the sections
Want data to support hiring a medical writer? Peer-reviewed articles receiving medical writing support had better adherence to data reporting guidelines and were judged by
