Cargando…
Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow?
This short essay considers preferential publication and impact factor as stimuli, instrumentally conditioning medical researchers. The author postulates that publication houses emphasising publication of the highest levels of evidence (ie, meta-analyses) at the detriment of other levels of evidence,...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7285930/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32566754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2382120520924002 |
_version_ | 1783544789086502912 |
---|---|
author | Seery, Samuel |
author_facet | Seery, Samuel |
author_sort | Seery, Samuel |
collection | PubMed |
description | This short essay considers preferential publication and impact factor as stimuli, instrumentally conditioning medical researchers. The author postulates that publication houses emphasising publication of the highest levels of evidence (ie, meta-analyses) at the detriment of other levels of evidence, is inadvertently guiding researchers to overlook necessary research for more individualised care. The author recommends preferential publication and impact factor should be openly discussed by medical educators to ensure we are training researchers to conduct meaningful, high quality, innovative research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7285930 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72859302020-06-19 Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? Seery, Samuel J Med Educ Curric Dev Opinion This short essay considers preferential publication and impact factor as stimuli, instrumentally conditioning medical researchers. The author postulates that publication houses emphasising publication of the highest levels of evidence (ie, meta-analyses) at the detriment of other levels of evidence, is inadvertently guiding researchers to overlook necessary research for more individualised care. The author recommends preferential publication and impact factor should be openly discussed by medical educators to ensure we are training researchers to conduct meaningful, high quality, innovative research. SAGE Publications 2020-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7285930/ /pubmed/32566754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2382120520924002 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Opinion Seery, Samuel Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title | Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title_full | Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title_fullStr | Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title_full_unstemmed | Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title_short | Are We Conditioning EBM Researchers to be Innovative or Narrow? |
title_sort | are we conditioning ebm researchers to be innovative or narrow? |
topic | Opinion |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7285930/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32566754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2382120520924002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT seerysamuel areweconditioningebmresearcherstobeinnovativeornarrow |