Skip to main content
This editorial calls for the clear presentation of study findings, to ensure that results, which have been so carefully gathered, are appropriately communicated. [1] The Global Alliance for Publication Professionals (GAPP), agrees with these sentiments, and that “Most of the responsibility for improving writing in academic medicine, however, falls upon the physicians and scientists who produce it”. However, it has been shown that the major barrier to publishing research is lack of time,[2,3] which may well lead to poorly written manuscripts, as well as non-disclosure of results. The issue of waste in biomedical research has been tackled before,[4] and GAPP has previously highlighted the role professional medical writers could play in resolving the burden of time constraints and lack of training faced by researchers (see Pubmed Commons comments [4]). We would like to highlight the role of professional medical writers in helping authors deliver high-quality, accurate and timely manuscripts in an ethical and transparent manner. Such medical writers are highly qualified individuals, combining scientific rigor, in-depth knowledge of publication guidelines and aptitude for effective communication. [5–7] Professional writing services have a recognized impact on publication success, [8–13] and although such professional assistance does have budgetary implications, as previously suggested, provision could be included in research [4] or departmental budgets.[3,14] Indeed, there may be cost savings associated with the lower time requirement for authors preparing a high-quality readable, concise, and accurate manuscript that adheres to journal instructions to authors and applicable best practices.
References
1. Collier R. A call for clarity and quality in medical writing. CMAJ. 2017;189(46):E1407. doi:10.1503/cmaj.171265.
2. Scherer RW, Ugarte-Gil C, Schmucker C, Meerpohl JJ. Authors report lack of time as main reason for unpublished research presented at biomedical conferences: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(7):803-810. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.01.027.
3. Duracinsky M, Lalanne C, Rous L, et al. Barriers to publishing in biomedical journals perceived by a sample of French researchers: results of the DIAzePAM study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;(17):96. doi:10.1186/s12874-015-0016-z.
4. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet (London, England). 2014;383(9913):267-276. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X.
5. AMWA‒EMWA‒ISMPP Joint Position Statement on the Role of Professional Medical Writers. http://journal.emwa.org/writing-better/amwa-emwa-ismpp-joint-position-st.... Published 2017. Accessed November 27, 2017.
6. Wager E, Woolley K, Adshead V, et al. Awareness and enforcement of guidelines for publishing industry-sponsored medical research among publication professionals: the Global Publication Survey. BMJ Open. 2014;4(4):e004780. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004780.
7. Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, et al. Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(6):461–464. doi:10.7326/M15-0288.
8. Gattrell WT, Hopewell S, Young K, et al. Professional medical writing support and the quality of randomised controlled trial reporting: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(2):e010329. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010329.
9. Hamilton CW, Gertel A, Jacobs A, Marchington J, Weaver S, Woolley K. Mythbusting Medical Writing: Goodbye Ghosts, Hello Help. Account Res. 2016;23(3):178-194. doi:10.1080/08989621.2015.1088788.
10. Woolley KL, Lew RA, Stretton S, et al. Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27(6):1175-1182. doi:10.1185/03007995.2011.573546.
11. Marchington JM, Burd GP. Author attitudes to professional medical writing support. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(10):2103-2108. doi:10.1185/03007995.2014.939618.
12. Jacobs A. Adherence to the CONSORT guideline in papers written by professional medical writers. Med Writ. 2010;19(3):196-200.
13. Mills I, Sheard C, Hays M, Douglas K, Winchester CC, Gattrell WT. Professional medical writing support and the reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals. F1000Research. 2017;6:1489. doi:10.12688/f1000research.12268.2.
14. Manring MM, Panzo JA, Mayerson JL. A Framework for Improving Resident Research Participation and Scholarly Output. J Surg Educ. 2014;71(1):8-13. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.07.011.