Ignorer la navigation


Editorial Rating

9

Qualities

  • Analytical
  • Scientific
  • Concrete Examples

Recommendation

Medical journals were first to sound the alarm about the substandard quality of scientific studies they were asked to publish. With billions of corporate dollars and reputations at stake, many journals are demanding more accountability, objectivity and standardized data collection methods. This special feature section of Science explores why inept or dishonest research is a critical life-or-death issue, and how publications are working with researchers to solve it. It’s a must-read for anyone involved with scientific research, particularly those interested in medical journals.

Take-Aways

  • Papers published in prestigious medical journals often “read like drug company ads.”
  • Medical research was a natural initiation for journalology, because its results can seriously impact lives.
  • Journalology competes with medical entities for money and headlines.

About the Authors

Martin Enserink is international news editor for Science. Jennifer Couzin-Frankel is a Science staff writer. Jop de Vrieze is a science writer in Amsterdam. Erik Stokstad is a reporter at Science. Kai Kupferschmidt is a contributing correspondent for Science based in Berlin, Germany.