Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26425033›Full record

ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2015

Essential Components of Educational Programs on Biomedical Writing, Editing, and Publishing.

Edward Barroga, Maya Vardaman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Edward BarrogaDepartment of International Medical Communications, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Maya VardamanDepartment of International Medical Communications, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The primary objective of educational programs on biomedical writing, editing, and publishing is to nurture ethical skills among local and international researchers and editors from diverse professional backgrounds. The mechanics, essential components, and target outcomes of these programs are described in this article. The mechanics covers the objectives, design, benefits, duration, participants and qualifications, program formats, administrative issues, and mentorship. The essential components consist of three core schedules: Schedule I Basic aspects of biomedical writing, editing, and communications; Schedule II Essential skills in biomedical writing, editing, and publishing; and Schedule III Interactive lectures on relevant topics. The target outcomes of the programs comprise knowledge acquisition, skills development, paper write-up, and journal publication. These programs add to the prestige and academic standing of the host institutions.

Indexed as

Medical WritingPublishingBiomedical ResearchEducation, MedicalHumansAcademic ProgramEditingEducationPublishingWriting

Identifiers

PMID26425033
PMCPMC4575925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.