ABSTRACT
Resumen: La Red de Editores de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología (ESC, por su sigla en inglés) constituye un foro dinámico dedicado a discusiones editoriales y respalda las recomendaciones del Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas (ICMJE, por su sigla en inglés) destinadas a mejorar la calidad científica de las revistas biomédicas. La paternidad literaria confiere crédito, además de importantes recompensas académicas. Recientemente, sin embargo, el ICMJE ha destacado que la autoría también exige que los autores sean responsables y se hagan cargo de lo que publican. Estas cuestiones ahora están cubiertas por el nuevo (cuarto) criterio para la autoría. Los autores deben aceptar hacerse responsables de lo que escriben y garantizar un adecuado enfoque de las cuestiones concernientes a la precisión e integridad de todo el trabajo. Esta revisión analiza las implicancias de este cambio de paradigma en los requisitos de autoría con el objetivo de aumentar la conciencia sobre las buenas prácticas científicas y editoriales.
Summary: The Editors´ Network of the European Society of Cardiology provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
Resumo: A Rede de Editores da Sociedade Europeia de Cardiologia é um fórum dinâmico para discussões editoriais e apoia as recomendações do Comitê Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas, visando melhorar a qualidade científica das revistas biomédicas. A autoria confere crédito, além de importantes recompensas acadêmicas. Recentemente, no entanto, o Comitê Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas enfatizou que a autoria também requer que os autores sejam responsáveis do que escrevem e se encarreguem do que publicam. Essas questões agora estão cobertas pelo novo (quarto) critério de autoria. Os autores devem concordar em ser responsáveis e garantir que as questões relativas à precisão e integridade de todo o trabalho sejam abordadas de maneira apropriada. Esta revisão discute as implicações dessa mudança de paradigma nos requisitos de autoria, com o objetivo de aumentar a conscientização sobre as boas práticas científicas e editoriais.
Subject(s)
Humans , Authorship , Social Responsibility , Turkey , Cardiology , Editorial Policies , EuropeABSTRACT
Abstract The Editors Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
Subject(s)
Publishing/ethics , Authorship , Social Responsibility , Editorial PoliciesABSTRACT
El Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas (ICMJE, por su sigla en inglés) elabora recomendaciones para mejorar las normas editoriales y la calidad científica de las revistas biomédicas. Estas recomendaciones van desde uniformizar los requisitos técnicos hasta cuestiones editoriales más complejas e imprecisas, incluyendo aspectos éticos del proceso científico. Recientemente se han propuesto medidas como el registro de ensayos clínicos, la declaración de conflictos de interés y nuevos criterios para la autoría, resaltando la importancia de la responsabilidad y la rendición de cuentas. El año pasado se lanzó una nueva iniciativa editorial para compartir los datos de los ensayos clínicos. La presente revisión analiza esta innovadora iniciativa con el objetivo de sensibilizar a los lectores, investigadores, autores y editores de la Red de Editores de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología. Data Sharing: a new editorial initiative of the international committee of medical journal editors. Implications for the Editors´ Network
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship -emphasizing the importance of responsibility and accountability-, have been proposed. Last year, a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data was launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and editors belonging to the Editors´ Network of the European Society of Cardiology.
Subject(s)
Humans , Access to Information , Scientific Publication Ethics , Clinical Trials as TopicABSTRACT
Abstract: The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship - emphasizing the importance of responsibility and accountability -, have been proposed. Last year, a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data was launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and editors belonging to the Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology.
Resumen: El Comite internacional de editores de revistas medicas (CIERM) propone recomendaciones para mejorar los standares editoriales y la calidad científica de las revistas biomédicas. Estas recomendaciones abarcan desde requerimeintos ténicos uniformados a temas editoriales mas complejos y evasivos, como los aspectos bioéticos relacionados con el proceso científico. Recientemente se han propuesto algunas iniciativas editoriales, como el registro de los ensayos clinicos, la declaración de los conflictos de interés y los nuevos criterios para autoría (que destacan la responsabilidad de los autores sobre el estudio). El año pasado se presentó una nueva iniciativa editorial para resaltar la importancia de compartir los datos generados en los estudios clinicos. En este artículo se discute esta nueva iniciativa editorial, con la idea de difundir su conocimiento entre los lectores, investigadores, autores y editores de la red de editores de revistas cardiovasculares nacionales de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología.
Subject(s)
Periodicals as Topic , Publishing , Cardiology , Information Dissemination , Editorial Policies , International CooperationABSTRACT
Abstract The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship - emphasizing the importance of responsibility and accountability-, have been proposed. Last year, a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data was launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and editors belonging to the Editors´ Network of the European Society of Cardiology.
Resumo O Comitê Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas (ICMJE) fornece recomendações para aprimorar o padrão editorial e a qualidade científica das revistas biomédicas. Tais recomendações variam desde requisitos técnicos de uniformização até assuntos editoriais mais complexos e elusivos, como os aspectos éticos do processo científico. Recentemente, foram propostos registro de ensaios clínicos, divulgação de conflitos de interesse e novos critérios de autoria, enfatizando a importância da responsabilidade e da responsabilização. No último ano, lançou-se uma nova iniciativa editorial para fomentar o compartilhamento dos dados de ensaios clínicos. Esta revisão discute essa nova iniciativa visando a aumentar a conscientização de leitores, investigadores, autores e editores filiados à Rede de Editores da Sociedade Europeia de Cardiologia.
Subject(s)
Humans , Periodicals as Topic/standards , Clinical Trials as Topic/organization & administration , Information Dissemination , Editorial Policies , Datasets as Topic/standards , Societies, Medical , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , International CooperationABSTRACT
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship-emphasizing the importance of responsibility and accountability-, have been proposed. This year a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data has been launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and Editors of the Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology.
Subject(s)
Humans , Authorship , Cardiology , Conflict of Interest , Disclosure , Information Dissemination , Research PersonnelABSTRACT
Las revistas biomédicas tienen como objetivo fundamental publicar artículos de la máxima calidad científica y conseguir una amplia difusión de sus contenidos. Las revistas científicas compiten para publicar los mejores trabajos de investigación que se generan en su disciplina. Para ello deben realizar una valoración rigurosa de todos los trabajos que reciben para identificar y seleccionar sólo los mejores. El proceso de "peer-review", o revisión por pares, se ha considerado clásicamente como una parte fundamental del proceso científico. Consiste en la valoración crítica de los artículos científicos por expertos externos e independientes. Este proceso es fundamental para la mejora de los artículos y para guiar a los editores en su decisión final. Aunque el proceso está bien consolidado entre la comunidad científica y editorial internacional, siempre ha sido cuestionado. A lo largo del tiempo se han implementado múltiples estrategias para mejorar su calidad y para optimizar sus resultados pero el sistema sigue teniendo limitaciones. Paradójicamente, existe poca evidencia científica de que el proceso de "peer review", universalmente aceptado para validar la ciencia, sea realmente efectivo. Por eso su calidad debe supervisarse muy estrechamente para intentar conseguir la excelencia, ya que de ella depende la credibilidad del proceso científico. En esta revisión analizaremos críticamente el proceso de "peer review" y explicaremos por qué, a pesar de sus limitaciones, sigue considerándose como el "estándar de oro" en la valoración de manuscritos científicos por parte de las revistas biomédicas.
The main objective of biomedical journals is to publish high-quality scientific studies and to ensure a widespread dissemination of their contents. Journals compete for the best science generated in their respective disciplines and, therefore, they critically scrutinize the scientific quality of all submitted papers in order to identify and select only those that merit publication. The "peer review" system represents the cornerstone of the scientific process. It provides a critical appraisal, by external independent experts, of the studies under consideration. The system is intended to improve the quality of the submitted papers but also to help the Editors in their decision-making process. The process has been widely embraced by the scientific and editorial international community but it is not free from caveats. In fact, although several strategies have been implemented to improve its quality and the results obtained, limitations still persist. Accordingly, its quality should be closely monitored to ensure excellence. Surprisingly, although the "peer review" process is universally accepted to validate the science, limited scientific information exists on its real value. In this review we will critically analyze the "peer review" process and we will advance some ideas that may help to understand why, in spite of its limitations, it remains the "gold standard" for the selection of scientific manuscripts by biomedical journals.