Original articles in the medical literature should have informative titles, also referred to as declarative titles. A nondeclarative title expresses the study\'s theme (topic) or, at most, the materials and methods used, whereas an informative title highlights the significance of the study findings (study\'s significance) and, at the very least, its results. A manuscript is typically organized to cover (i) the theme, (ii) materials and methods, (iii) results, and (iv) conclusion (study\'s significance). Consequently, a nondeclarative title typically encompasses only the (ii) stage, whereas an informative title extends to the (iii) or (iv) stages. This study underscores the importance of informative titles in medical papers and offers guidance for crafting titles that align with established paper writing fundamentals.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: A bibliometric analysis was performed to analyze and compare the top 100 articles from the most well-known five pain journals: Pain, Pain Physician, Pain Medicine, Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, and Journal of Pain. A query of the Scopus database was performed to filter the top 200 most cited articles from each journal. CY score was calculated for the top 200 articles from each journal by dividing the total number of citations by the number of years the article has been published.
RESULTS: All articles had a collective analysis of the top CY scores, the top 100 of which were further analyzed. The pain subtype, type of publication, country of origin, and senior author were extrapolated from these top 100 articles. Frequency tables were organized, revealing Pain Journal as the highest publishing journal out of the top 100 articles. Chronic pain was the most studied subtype of pain and narrative reviews were the most common type of evidence. Studies were also organized in five-year epochs to analyze the frequency of publications in these intervals. Results show that 2010-2014 had the highest frequency of articles published overall. Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is also an objective indicator of the average number of citations per published article from each journal. The journal with the highest JIF was Pain with an impact factor of 7.926. (6).

The world of publication can seem intimidating and closed to the newcomer. How then does one even begin to get a foot in the door? In this paper, the authors draw from the literature and their recent lived experience as editorial interns to consider this challenge under the theme of access, and how it overlaps with the various components of academic publication. The main three components of the publication \'machine\' are discussed in this article, authoring, reviewing, and editing. These are preceded by the first, and arguably foundational, interaction with academic journal publishing-reading. Without reading articles across different journals, and even in different disciplines, understanding the breadth of scholarship and its purpose is impossible. The subsequent components of authoring, reviewing, and editing, which are all enhanced by ongoing familiarity with current literature through further reading, are considered in further detail in the remainder of this article, with practical advice provided as to how to gain access and experience in each of these areas, for example, writing non-research article manuscripts, engaging in collaborative peer review, and applying for editorial opportunities (with perseverance) when the opportunity presents itself. Medical education publication can seem daunting and closed to entry-level academics. This article is written to dispel this view, and challenges the notion that the world of publication is reserved for experts only. On the contrary, newcomers to the field are essential for academic publications to retain relevance, dynamism, and innovation particularly in the face of the changing landscape of medical education.

Students that graduate with degrees in science may pursue a variety of career roles. Many of these roles may require them to read primary scientific literature (PSL) or even write up their own manuscripts for submission. While literature has recognized the importance of integrating PSL into undergraduate curriculum, it is also important for students to recognize the writing process that one may need to take part in if they seek to disseminate their own publications. This article will go through a research assignment that was given to an introductory journal club class for biology majors at a large R1 Hispanic-serving Institution. This assignment was designed to mirror the publication process at many journals including drafting a manuscript, integrating editor recommendations, and drafting a letter to the editor. In the end, students produce a review paper while becoming more familiar with the traditional publication process. In turn, this can prepare them to eventually seek to publish their own manuscripts.

OBJECTIVE: ChatGPT\'s role in medical writing is a topic of discussion. I experimented whether ChatGPT almost automatically generates Correspondence or Letter addressed to a \"translated\" article, and thereby wish to arouse discussion regarding ChatGPT use in medical writing.
METHODS: I input an English article of mine into ChatGPT, tasking it with generating an English Disagreement Letter (Letter 1). Next, I tasked ChatGPT with translating the manuscript addressed to from English-French-Spanish-German. Then, I once again tasked ChatGPT with generating an English Disagreement Letter addressed to a German manuscript (triplicate translated manuscript) (Letter 2).
RESULTS: Letters 1 and 2 are readable and reasonable, shooting the point that the author (myself) felt as the weakness of the article. Letters addressed to French (single translation) and to Spanish (double translation) and longer Letters (corresponding to Letters 1 and 2) are also readable, and thus stand.
CONCLUSIONS: Solely based on this experiment, one may be able to write a letter even without understanding the meaning of the paper being addressed, let alone the language of the paper. Although this humble experiment does not conclude anything, I plea for a comprehensive discussion on the implications of these findings.

The purpose of peer review is to evaluate the scientific merit of the submitted work and to assess suitability for publication. This process is intended to provide an unbiased, independent critique to ensure publication of high-quality manuscripts that demonstrate validity and reliability. Reviewers are subject-matter experts who volunteer their time to participate in peer review. A proper review provides constructive and helpful feedback in a timely manner that authors can use to improve both current and future work. When given the opportunity to revise, authors should carefully consider all comments and adequately address all concerns. This paper provides guidance to clinicians for both aspects of the peer review process: participating as a reviewer and responding to reviewer feedback.

暂无摘要。

Writing a scientific manuscript can be a very intimidating process for new writers. However, writing a scientific research article can be broken down into discrete steps to make the process more digestible. Radiology manuscripts have common conventions that differ from research in technical and other medical fields. The practical steps summarized within describe what to do before you start writing, successful writing strategies, and common writing styles. Templates for producing an abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion are outlined, along with tips to collect references and produce high quality figures. All writers can benefit from an outside writing perspective, and the practical steps described should ease the transition from a blank page to a finished manuscript.

Scientific review articles are comprehensive, focused reviews of the scientific literature written by subject matter experts. The task of writing a scientific review article can seem overwhelming; however, it can be managed by using an organized approach and devoting sufficient time to the process. The process involves selecting a topic about which the authors are knowledgeable and enthusiastic, conducting a literature search and critical analysis of the literature, and writing the article, which is composed of an abstract, introduction, body, and conclusion, with accompanying tables and figures. This article, which focuses on the narrative or traditional literature review, is intended to serve as a guide with practical steps for new writers. Tips for success are also discussed, including selecting a focused topic, maintaining objectivity and balance while writing, avoiding tedious data presentation in a laundry list format, moving from descriptions of the literature to critical analysis, avoiding simplistic conclusions, and budgeting time for the overall process.