Reply to "Ten simple rules for getting published"

PLoS Computational Biology

Volumn 3, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 1836-

  Grosch, Eric ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SIMPLE++;

BIOLOGY; LETTER; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLICATION;

EID: 34848842791     PISSN: 1553734X     EISSN: 15537358     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030190.t001     Document Type: Letter

References (38)

1. Bourne PE (2005) Ten simple rules for getting published. PLoS Comput Biol 1: e57. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010057
2. Science journals impact factors. Available: http://gezhi.org/wp-content/ uploads/2006/06/2005%20SCI.zip. Accessed 17 August 2007.
3. Issacs D, Fitzgerald D (1999) Seven alternatives to evidence based medicine. Br Med J 319: 1618.
4. Chalmers I, Haynes B (1994) Reporting, updating and correcting systematic reviews of the effects of health care. Br Med J 309: 862-865.
5. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (1992) Evidence-based medicine: A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 268: 2420-2425.
6. Altman DG (1994) The scandal of poor medical research. Br Med J 308: 283-284.
7. Altman DG (2002) Poor-quality medical research: What can journals do? JAMA 287: 2765-2767.
8. Skrabanek P (1990) Nonsensus consensus. Lancet 335: 1446-1447.
9. Eddy DM (1990) Practice policies: Where do they come from? JAMA 263: 1265, 1269, 1272 passim.
10. Genuis SJ, Genuis SK (2006) Exploring the continuum: Medical information to effective clinical practice. Paper I. Towards aetiology-centred clinical practice. J Eval Clin Pract 12: 49-62.
11. Anon (1983) Unidentified curved bacilli on gastric epithelium in active chronic gastritis. Lancet 1: 1273-1275.
12. Davidoff F (1999) In the teeth of the evidence: The curious case of evidence-based medicine. Mt Sinai J Med 66: 75-83.
13. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, LaCroix AZ, Kooperberg C, et al. (2002) Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: Principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 288: 321-333.
14. Chalmers I (2001) Invalid health information is potentially lethal. Br Med J 322: 998.
15. Skrabanek P (1990) Why is preventive medicine exempted from ethical constraints? J Med Ethics 16: 187-190.
16. Metz M (2002) Criticism preserves the vitality of science. Nat Biotechnol 20: 867.
17. Harnad S (1982) Editor peer commentary on peer review. Behav Brain Sci 5: 185-186.
18. Grouse LD (1982) Dealing with alleged fraud in medical research. JAMA 248: 1637-1638.
19. Forscher BK (1980) The role of the referee. Scholarly Publishing 11: 165-169.
20. Commoner B (1978) Peering at peer review. Hosp Practice 13: 25, 29.
21. Shand J (2000) Arguing well. London: Routledge.
22. Ingle DJ (1972) Fallacies and errors in the wonderlands of biology, medicine and Lewis Carroll. Perspect Biol Med 15: 254-281.
23. Glantz SA (1997) Primer of biostatistics. 4th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
24. Bailar JC (1976) Bailar's laws of data analysis. Clin Pharmacol Ther 20: 113-119.
25. White SJ (1979) Statistical errors in papers in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 135: 336-342.
26. O'Fallon JR, Dubey SD, Salsburg DS, Edmonson JH, Soffer A, et al. (1978) Should there be statistical guidelines for medical research papers? Biometrics 34: 687-695.
27. James NT (1996) Scientific method and raw data should be considered. Br Med J 313: 169-170.
28. Mainland D (1984) Statistical ritual in clinical journals: Is there a cure? - I. Br Med J 288: 841-843.
29. Klein DF (2002) Peer review and data access. Cortex 38: 412.
30. Meguid MM, Shenkin A (2003) Introduction: Nutritional supplements and the quest to improve human performance - The need for the strictest standards and rigor when reporting clinical trials. Nutrition 19: 955-956.
31. DeMaria AN (2002) Peer review: Better than the alternatives. J Am Coll Cardiol 40: 1017-1018.
32. DeBakey L (1990) Journal peer reviewing. Anonymity or disclosure? Arch Ophthalmol 108: 345-349.
33. Grosch EN (2003) Reviewer diligence? Br J Sports Med 37: 187.
34. Stamps AE (1997) Using a dialectical scientific brief in peer review. Sci Eng Ethics 3: 85-98.
35. King DW, McDonald DD, Roderer NK (1981) Scientific journals in the United States. Stroudsburg (Pennsylvania): Hutchinson Ross.
36. Stehbens WE (1999) Basic philosophy and concepts underlying scientific peer review. Med Hypotheses 52: 31-36.
37. Raine CS (2003) Areviewer's lot is not a happy one. J Neuroimmunol 141: 1-2.
38. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MSeditors (1999) To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington (D.C.): National Academy Press.