Effects of technical editing in biomedical journals - A systematic review

被引:31
作者
Wager, E [1 ]
Middleton, P [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Australasian Coll Surg, Australian Safety & Efficacy Register New Interve, Adelaide, SA, Australia
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2002年 / 287卷 / 21期
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jama.287.21.2821
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Context Technical editing supposedly improves the accuracy and clarity of journal articles. We examined evidence of its effects on research reports in biomedical journals. Methods Subset of a systematic review using Cochrane methods, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other databases from earliest entries to February 2000 by using inclusive search terms; hand searching relevant journals. We selected comparative studies of the effects of editorial processes on original research articles between acceptance and publication in biomedical journals. Two reviewers assessed each study and performed independent data extraction. Results The 11 studies on technical editing indicate that it improves the readability of articles slightly (as measured by Gunning Fog and Flesch reading ease scores), may improve other aspects of their quality, can increase the accuracy of references and quotations, and raises the quality of abstracts. Supplying authors with abstract preparation instructions had no discernible effect. Conclusions Considering the time and resources devoted to technical editing, remarkably little is know about its effects or the effects of imposing different house styles. Studies performed at 3 journals employing relatively large numbers of professional technical editors suggest that their editorial processes are associated with increases in readability and quality of articles, but these findings may not be generalizable to other journals.
引用
收藏
页码:2821 / 2824
页数:4
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]  
ALDERSON P, 2002, EDITORIAL PEER REV I
[2]  
Biddle C, 1996, AANA J, V64, P65
[3]  
Comans M L, 1990, Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd, V134, P2338
[4]   REFERENCE ACCURACY IN THE DERMATOLOGICAL LITERATURE [J].
GEORGE, PM ;
ROBBINS, K .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, 1994, 31 (01) :61-64
[5]   MANUSCRIPT QUALITY BEFORE AND AFTER PEER-REVIEW AND EDITING AT ANNALS OF INTERNAL-MEDICINE [J].
GOODMAN, SN ;
BERLIN, J ;
FLETCHER, SW ;
FLETCHER, RH .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1994, 121 (01) :11-21
[6]  
Gunning R., 1952, TECHNIQUE CLEAR WRIT
[7]   An evaluation of structured abstracts in journals published by the British Psychological Society [J].
Hartley, J ;
Benjamin, M .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 68 :443-456
[8]   Obtaining information accurately and quickly: Are structured abstracts more efficient? [J].
Hartley, J ;
Sydes, M ;
Blurton, A .
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1996, 22 (05) :349-356
[9]  
Hobma S O, 1992, Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd, V136, P637
[10]   DO READERS AND PEER REVIEWERS AGREE ON MANUSCRIPT QUALITY [J].
JUSTICE, AC ;
BERLIN, JA ;
FLETCHER, SW ;
FLETCHER, RH ;
GOODMAN, SN .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 272 (02) :117-119