ArticlePerspectives in biology and medicine2025
Philosophical in Confronting Rejection: Language Confusion in the Correspondence Between Editor and Author.
Article in Perspectives in biology and medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Publication of scientific and biomedical manuscripts in "high impact factor" (IF) journals is important in advancing careers, obtaining funding, and developing a field of research. Rejection by prestigious journals is not infrequent and usually painful, especially to young investigators. Reasons provided by an editor are often confusing. We assess the language of the rejection letter from a specific philosophical stance, originated by Ludwig Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein's late writings on language as usage and as inherent to human activity have profoundly influenced many of the humanities but have been less frequently applied to the sciences. However, Wittgenstein's ideas about language have relevance for understanding editorial correspondence and also, more broadly, for our thinking about scientific work and "science."
Indexed as
Identifiers
40059701PMC11974357What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.