Cabell’s Journal Blacklist expands further.
Lynda Chang, Beatrice Vetter-Ceriotti and Tamalette Loh of Complete HealthVizion discuss the use of social media within medical publications.
UNESCO uses this year’s World Science Day for Peace and Development to examine global disparities in open science.
Abstract ‘spin’ can distort a study’s findings and lead to inappropriate conclusions being drawn. But just how prevalent is this problem?
A new poll result published in the MAP newsletter explores the best approach for dealing with a non-responsive lead author.
[VIDEO] Commitments by the biopharmaceutical industry to clinical trial transparency: the evolving environment
Gemma Rogers, Communications Director at Oxford Pharmagenesis, discusses a study on clinical trial transparency.
Tim Ellison, Senior Medical Writer at Oxford PharmaGenesis, discusses a study into the open access policies of leading medical journals
[VIDEO] Professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting: a systematic review
Obaro Evuarherhe, Principal Consultant at Oxford PharmaGenesis, discusses professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting.
Jackie Marchington, Director of Global Operations at Caudex, discusses good practice for conference abstracts and presentations
Researchers continue to use the impact factor as a metric for their career progression, but is it a matter of misconstrued peer pressure?
An analysis of data sharing statements reveals that open data may lead to a citation advantage.
Help and guidance for writing narrative reviews and Delphi consensus statements.
Following the revised guidance on Plan S, Bernd Pulverer questions whether cOAlition S is making the most of the opportunity to push for open science.
Find out how to get involved in this year’s activities on #QualityinPeerReview.
A new tool from MPIP provides easily accessible information on open access options for industry-funded research.
The tasks and responsibilities of peer reviewers are examined as a step towards reaching a consensus on their role in biomedical publishing