Improving transparency in the reporting of systematic reviews without meta-analysis
Find out why guidance is needed and what’s covered in the new Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines.
A picture paints a thousand words: how data visualisation can improve scientific communication
In a recent article in Knowable magazine, Betsy Mason describes the benefits and pitfalls of different graphics and the need for better training in data visualisation.
Navigating the challenges of conference materials: insights from GPCAP
Jackie Marchington gives her perspective on the Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations (GPCAP) recommendations.
The ICMJE announces a new author disclosure form: what has changed and why?
Find out more about the impact the new ICMJE disclosure form will have on authors publishing in medical journals.
Call to action: help us to keep delivering freely-accessible, high quality news for medical publication professionals
The Publication Plan is now welcoming sponsorship, help us to keep delivering high quality, freely available new for medical publication professionals
New updates to the ICMJE’s reporting recommendations: focus on transparency
We summarise the key changes to the ICMJE recommendations for authors and medical publication professionals.
ISMPP poll: delayed review by lead author ‒ what would you do?
A new poll result published in the MAP newsletter explores the best approach for dealing with a non-responsive lead author.
[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.
[VIDEO] Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations: GPCAP
Jackie Marchington, Director of Global Operations at Caudex, discusses good practice for conference abstracts and presentations
Advantages and challenges of narrative reviews and Delphi consensus initiatives
Help and guidance for writing narrative reviews and Delphi consensus statements.
Does professional medical writing support impact the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting?
Findings of a systematic review show working with professional medical writers positively affects measures of quality, ethics and timeliness.
ISMPP poll: non-disclosure of possible COI by author ‒ what would you do?
The MAP newsletter explores an issue faced by medical publication professionals.
New guidelines for journals advise how to implement open peer review
As demand for transparency increases, many journals are adopting open peer review: learn more about best-practice guidelines for implementing such systems.
Are European universities failing to report clinical trial data in a timely manner?
A recent article from Nature news delves into clinical trial reporting following evidence showing that some universities are failing to meet EU regulations.
Is there too much reliance on computers to detect plagiarism?
Plagiarism detection software and the originality scores they generate are useful, but find out why human input is a fundamental part of the process.
Patient reported outcomes: are they an essential element of publication planning?
A recent article in Medical Writing provides insights into the importance of patient reported outcomes in publication planning and guidance for best practice.