国外和国内医学期刊的-不同之处课件

单击此处编辑母版标题样式,单击此处编辑母版文本样式,第二级,第三级,第四级,第五级,*,*,*,国外和国内,医学期刊的,不同之处,照日格图,中华医学杂志英文版,(Chin Med J),总编辑,中国医学论坛报 理事会理事、顾问、前总编辑,美国新英格兰医学杂志,(N,Engl,J Med),编委,中华儿科杂志 副总编辑,欧洲临床研究杂志,(,Eur,J,Clin,Invest),编委,国外的和国内的医学期刊有许多不同,国外不少期刊历史长、经验丰富、办刊质量高、刊登高质量高水平医学论文多、及时反映医学科学研究的进展、收录到国际大型科学文献数据库的多、高影响因子的期刊多。,刊名,创刊年,N,Engl,J Med,1812,Lancet,1823,BMJ,1840,JAMA,1883,Arch Intern Med,1908,Ann Intern Med,1927,Chest,1935,Chin Med J 1887,国外，特别是西方国家，以及澳大利亚、新西兰和日本的医学期刊，收录到,SCI,和,Medline,等大型数据库的很多。我国医学期刊，近几年已有,20,余部被,SCI,收录。,2007,年我国,(,包括港澳,),收录到,Medline,的期刊,87,部。,收录到,SCI,的我国内地医学及相关学科期刊,(,原有,),Journal Titles Impact factor,Chinese Medical Journal (,中华医学杂志 英文版,) 0.858,Acta,Pharmacol,Sin (,中国药理学报,) 1.397,Cell,Res,(,细胞研究,) 3.426,Acta,Biochim,Biophys,Sin (,中国生物化学生物物理学报,) 0.931,Asian J,Androl,(,亚洲男性学,) 1.737,Fungal Diversity (,真菌多样性,) 2.297,Science in China Series C, Life Sciences 0.533,收录到,SCI,的我国内地医学及相关学科期刊,(,新增，临床医学,),2.092,0.365,0.524,收录到,SCI,的我国内地医学及相关学科期刊,(,新增，基础和综合,),审稿方面的不同,国外很多期刊对审稿工作和审稿人的要求很高、很严格。,要求作到：公平、公正、严格遵守时间要求，保密，有高度负责的精神，认真进行审稿。,有利益冲突时及时向编辑部声明，放弃审阅稿件。,审稿的方式,盲化,单盲,(,目前比较多见,),双盲,完全公开,对稿件的总体评价,(,打分,),有些期刊请审稿人对稿件的创新性、科学性、实用价值等方面用评分的方法作出评价。,多数期刊要求审稿人在写审稿意见时，给编辑部和作者,分别,写出参考意见，不能混淆。不能将给编辑的意见，特别是关于稿件取舍的意见，写入给作者的意见框内,(,国内有些审稿人常这样作，这不妥,),。,审稿意见：,多数审稿人的审稿意见十分详细、具体。这些都对作者以及其他有关人员有重要的参考价值。,一般国外期刊的审稿意见由以下部分组成：,1,、对研究内容的概括，即主要目的和主要结果,2,、研究的选题、设计，或其他方面的主要问题,3,、文章的结构、表述、语言等方面存在的问题,4,、对稿件的处理意见,Reviewer: 1,In this article, the authors present the data on a randomized but not blinded study of,oseltamivir, a Chinese herbal combination (CHC), a combination of the two, or placebo in treatment of . The authors found similar clinical outcomes with,oseltamivir,or the CHC compared to placebo but no benefit of the combination. Despite the fact that this is both an interesting finding and a novel approach, there are significant challenges that must be addressed by the authors - either by providing additional details or by discussing why they were not done. Specifically:,1. Introduction - some detail about the CHC needs to be included as well as some background data - why was this combination of herbs picked over others (,esp,since the authors cite other studies of other combinations later)?,2. Methods:,A. There were a lot of sites involved - was one IRB approval sufficient?,B. How, specifically, was the CHC prepared - how was the solution standardized so that there were comparable amounts of active compounds in each dose?,C. Why were the individuals hospitalized? This is not typical for influenza studies in high school students with mild disease?,D. How were symptom scores and symptom alleviation defined? Since one of the most important endpoints is symptom alleviation, why was this only done at discharge instead of when the patients felt better?,E. Was no virology, other than initial swabbing, performed?,Virologic,outcomes are a critical component and failure to assess this significantly limits the value of this study.,F. I am surprised that you had such a round number for two different sample size calculations.,G. Symptom score is not standardized and definitions are also not consistent with prior flu studies making comparisons challenging.,3. Results - theres little more than what is presented in the abstract - more - including details about changes in symptom scores over time; clearly virology is needed as well.,4. Discussion:,A. Need to discuss better how this compound was picked and why the simpler compound wasnt assessed? What is felt to be the active ingredient? Are there studies planned to define this?,B. Since the CHC functions with several proposed mechanisms, why do the authors hypothesize that there was no benefit to the combination?,C. There are far more limitations than are listed,Reviewer: 2,Summary,1. Double-blind method is not used, although it was randomized controlled trial.,2. Combination therapy of,oseltamivir,and other CNS stimulating drugs is potentially harmful and is not recommended as routine therapy for influenza especially otherwise healthy teenagers.,3. It is difficult to understand the reasons why you included patients who presented more than 48 hours (but within 72 hours) after the onset of symptoms.,4. Efficacy primary end point (time to resolution of fever) is not appropriate to evaluate the efficacy of,oseltamivir,.,5. Medication information other than the study drugs was not available except for acetaminophen and antibiotics. Especially,NSAIDs,and cough medicines affect the outcome but were not described.,6. there seems some bias in the degree of fever and time from onset of illness to intervention,7. However, proportion of participants with complete recovery at discharge was not significantly different in each study group compared control group.,8. Moreover that of M-MXSGT group (62.4%) is rather lower than control group (69.6%).,9. Reported adverse events are extremely few. Is it the real figure?,Details,1. Double-blind method is not used, although it was randomized controlled trial.,This is stated in your discussion in the manuscript. Further explanation may be unnecessary.,2. Combination therapy of,oseltamivir,and other CNS stimulating drugs is potentially harmful and is not recommended as routine therapy for influenza especially otherwise healthy teenagers.,Teenagers are thought susceptible to serious abnormal,behaviours,leading to accidents even with fatal outcome1. . Other,neuropsychiatric,adverse reactions to,oseltamivir,including sudden death especially during sleep are reported 1.,1),Hama,R.2008b Fatal,neuropsychiatric,adverse reactions to,oseltamivir,:,case series and overview of causal relationship.,Int,J Risk Safety Med: 20: 5-36 11,Several animal experiments are also suggesting the causality, especially used in combination with CNS-stimulant such as ephedrine 2, 3 (main ingredient of M-MXSGT is,ephedra,which is the mixture of ephedrine like substances).,2) Izumi Y,Tokuda,K,Odell,KA,Zorumski,CF,Narahashi,T. 2007.,Neuroexcitatory,actions of,Tamiflu,and its,carboxylate,metabolite.,Neurosci,Lett,. 426(1):54-8.,Epub,2007 Sep 1.,3) Izumi Y,Tokuda,K, ODell K,Zorumski,C,Narahashi,T. 2008. Synaptic and,behavioral interactions of,oseltamivir,(,Tamiflu,) with,neurostimulants,.,Hum Exp,Toxicol,. 27(12):911-7.,3. The reason why you included patients who presented more than 48 hours (but within 72 hours) after the onset of symptoms is not understandable.,There has been no proof based on the randomized controlled trials that show the efficacy in reducing time to resolution of symptoms by,oseltamivir,if it is given after more than 48 hours from the onset of symptoms. So if they include those presented more than 48 hours after the onset of flu symptoms and claim the treatment efficacy of,oseltamivir, it is misleading.,4. Efficacy primary end point (time to resolution of fever) is not appropriate to evaluate the efficacy of,oseltamivir,.,Because unchanged,oseltamivir,that easily enter the brain through blood brain-barrier (BBB) and has CNS depressing action which lower body temperature 3, 4, decreased time to resolution of fever could easily proved without true efficacy against flu.,4) Ono H, Nagano Y,Matsunami,N, Sugiyama S, Yamamoto S, Tanabe M.2008.,Oseltamivir, an anti-influenza virus drug, produces hypothermia in mice.,Biol,Pharm,Bull. 31(4):638-42.,5. Medication information other than the study drugs was not available except acetaminophen and antibiotics. Especially,NSAIDs,and medicines for the improvement of cough affect the outcome 4, 5 but were not described.,M-MXSGT has antipyretic action like,NSAIDs,. it means in the acute phase it decreased body temperature but in the later phase, it disturb the recovery of flu symptoms. This adverse effect may explain lower tendency in proportion of full recovery in the M-MXSGT arm, though the fever resolution was faster than control arm.,5),Hama,R. A/H1N1 flu.,NSAIDs,and flu. BMJ. 2009 Jun 15;338:b2345.,doi,: 10.1136/bmj.b2345.,6. There seems some bias in the degree of fever and time from onset of illness to intervention,a) Degree of fever: rather lower in control group: per cent of 39 C: 14.0 % in control arm,vs,23.5 % in,oseltamivir,arm, 21,4 % in M-MXSGT arm and 24.5 % in combination arm. Flu patients with high fever tend to recover faster than those with low fever.,b) Time from onset of illness to intervention: rather shorter in control arm (30 hours) than in the study arms (35, 35, 32 respectively).,late presenting may recover earlier, so the baseline factor is more favorable in the study arms than the control arm.,7. However, proportion of participants with complete recovery at discharge was not significantly different in each study group compared control group.,Proportions of complete recovery were 69.6 %, 72.5 %, 62.1 and 70.6 % respectively.,8. Moreover that of M-MXSGT group (62.4%) is rather lower than control group (69.6%).,Considering the,favourable,baseline factors, this is more noted and seriously considered and discussed.,9. Reported adverse events are extremely few. Its unbelievable.,In the,RCTs,of,oseltamivir,for treatment of seasonal flu done in the western countries or in Japan, percent of participants who had at least one adverse event were report about 40 to 50 %.,10. Please refer the papers which were published recently on the systematic,review on neuraminidase inhibitor especially on,oseltamivir,: as bellow:, editors,他们都是波士顿地区，特别是哈佛大学医学院的教学医院的学术带头人，他们基本保证出席每周一次的总编、副总编审稿会，经认真的讨论，决定刊出哪些文章。,高度重视网站建设,注重网站的更新、改版，吸引读者阅读， 提高影响力，给读者提供大量有临床应用价值的音频、视频等多媒体资料，提高期刊的影响力。如每周一次的“,Audio Briefing”,音频材料，“,Video in Clinical Medicine”,的视频材料，“,Clinical Practice”,全文录音材料，等等。另外还提供个体化的文献服务等。考虑到未来媒体的发展，尽可能多地提供适合于无线媒体、掌上电脑等设备的文献资料，如,MP3,或,MP4,等格式的文件资料。,期刊与读者的互动性强,用多种方式与读者互动，包括鼓励刊登通讯文章、在网站上邀请读者参与一些病例的诊断或治疗方法选择，以及定期召开与青年医师的座谈会等。网站上设继续教育项目，提供继续教育学分。,国际期刊,对稿件的要求更严格,：,1,、篇幅相对长,2,、要求方法部分的内容更详细、具体,3,、对伦理学和统计学的要求更高、更严谨,4,、对前瞻性临床试验稿件，要求必须在研究开始,前在规定的网站上注册。,5,、要求公开作者的利益冲突或关系,6,、对参考文献数目的限制较松，可引用较多文献,7,、综合性医学期刊要求稿件有普遍影响力,8,、许多国际医学期刊对稿件的处理速度快,我国已有,20,多部医学期刊进入,SCI,，也有,80,多部医学期刊进入,Medline,。我相信，通过与国际一流医学期刊的交流与合作，通过学习国际一流医学期刊办刊方针、方法等，我国医学和其他科技期刊将会取得更多的进步和成功,!,谢 谢,!,