The human head and face is the target structure of a large number of medical disciplines which are subject to a continuing trend in medical science – 'ongoing fragmentation' or, to use a better established term, 'opening up new fields'. An adverse side effect of this trend is the separation of scientists, which contributes to a breakdown in communication. Specialization is necessary, but who is able to recombine the pieces of knowledge gained in different branches of science? Who is able to trace back an effect to its cause through the whole system? What is the instrument that enables scientists to think 'laterally', or across disciplines?Head & Face Medicine. To induce 'intra-interdisciplinary' thinking of scientists by bringing together the findings achieved by different researchers from various specialties, all exploring the same target structure – the human head and face. Head & Face Medicine's objective is to support scientists in gaining new insights from different views, to recognize patterns, to extract new thoughts, to recombine them and bring new visions to life.To be one of these instruments is the vision of Head & Face Medicine a cross between a traditional journal and a data stream which can be queried, analyzed and processed with the aim of increasing medical knowledge in the area of head and face medicine. These tools represent several advantages: fast publication, increase of a paper's scientific impact and ethical superiority.Evolving tools like the internet, e-publishing, Open Access and open peer review make Head & Face Medicine looks forward to receiving your contributions. Hardly any region of the human body depends upon the synergism of a variety of medical disciplines to the same extent as the human head. To understand the complexity of the whole system 'head' it is necessary to reduce the system to its most discriminable elements and to explore their nature, because the elements realize certain functions in the whole. This philosophical tradition, the reduction principle, continues to be adhered to and developed in medical science. Attributable to this development is the ongoing fragmentation of medical disciplines into more and more sub-(sub-)specialties; or to put it more positively, one would argue: the opening of new fields.However, an adverse side effect of this progress is the separation of scientists working in different sub-specialties, resulting in a breakdown in communication. Intensive scientific debate is common within the fields but not across them. Specialization is necessary, but where in this process are the individuals who are able to recombine the pieces of knowledge gained in narrow but deep branches of science? Who is able to trace back an effect to its cause through the whole system? What is the instrument that enables scientists to think lateral or parallel to their own discipline? Definitely, there is not one single instrument, but an important one is communication – communication on different levels of knowledge linked and cross-referenced to disciplines working on the same target structure. The traditional term of this concept is 'interdisciplinary'.Head & Face Medicine has developed a particular vision.What do we really mean by 'interdisciplinary'? It is not the collaboration with a scientist of an adjacent medical branch who is not interested in your problem. Interdisciplinary is a kind of thinking, and it is initiated in an individual mind. What we really mean is 'intra-interdisciplinary'. To induce this way of thinking we need a particular dose of knowledge from the adjacent disciplines. Therefore, Progress in interdisciplinary diagnostics, therapy and research of pathologic conditions of the human head and face by raising new scientific questions which demand new ways of thinking to improve medical quality.Head & Face Medicine, the co-founders of the journal, Ulrich Meyer and Hans-Peter Wiesmann, will illustrate their vision of 'intra-interdisciplinary', with thoughts from bio-mineralization, tissue-engineering and maxillofacial surgery.To make this vision come true, we need your help. We need your ideas, insights, observations, and research results, across barriers of specialization, to induce creativity and innovations. This would allow us to learn from all the different disciplines which are involved in head and face disorders, by communicating, by presenting our findings, by defending our hypotheses, and by criticizing ideas and debating methodologies across the frontiers of our own formal training. It would allow us to be interdisciplinary in all ways of thinking to enrich medical knowledge. In the inaugural issue of On the way to fulfilling this mission we are grateful that it was possible to establish an international editorial board which reflects the principle of inter-disciplinarity in combination with scientific quality. All members of the editorial board are well known scientists in their respective area of expertise and have agreed to spend a vast amount of their valuable time to support our vision.Evolution is what we need in scientific literature, not revolution . With BiIt has been emphasized that some of the current processes of publication involve a considerable delay in the dissemination of clinical research, which has a significant effect on patients' health . A revieHead & Face Medicine aims to provide the authors with a first decision within six weeks after manuscript submission. Immediately on acceptance, the scientific community can read the author's article as a provisional PDF version. Once the journal is included in PubMed , the provisional version will be sent to PubMed and included after a 48-hour delay. This will be replaced by the final full-text version when available. Head & Face Medicine's general publication process is therefore faster than that of other journals with a 'rapid' publication section [Many solutions have been suggested to promote timely publication. Irrespective of economic, moral and ethic arguments on 'Open Access' in scientific literature, what are today's facts? What is the benefit for the individual patient?Head & Face Medicine has adopted BioMed Central's Open Access Charter [Head & Face Medicine has competing interests.It has been shown that Open Access articles were cited 50–300% more often than non-Open Access articles from the same journal and year . The abiHead & Face Medicine and its benefits for science and the general public. For all who want to dive into the Open Access debate we recommend Peter Suber's weblog [About 20% of the total number of articles published annually are Open Access  and it hs weblog .Head & Face Medicine become freely and universally accessible online, and so the author's work can be read by anyone at no cost. The authors hold copyright for their work and grant anyone the right to reproduce and disseminate the article, provided that it is correctly cited and no errors are introduced [Head & Face Medicine's articles are archived in PubMed Central [All articles of troduced . A copy  Central , the US  Central  in Germa Central  in Franc Central , the NatHead & Face Medicine uses an open system because the ethical reasons to move away from anonymity are significant. Many publishing scientists have seen brusque, incompetent and destructive reports produced in anonymity. The worst abuses are blocking or stealing of new ideas. This behavior is not acceptable and we strongly believe that transparency leads to a more respectful and constructive communication.There are many arguments for and against open peer review. At present there is no evidence that any single kind of peer review leads to higher quality reports and feedback. Head & Face Medicine posts the signed reviews in a pre-publication history, which is freely available to access from the published article. Reviewers' names and reports are therefore easily accessible via the published article, which leads to wider recognition within the scientific community. With the open system, both sides win. The authors receive a constructive, high-quality contribution with a higher chance of acceptance [Reviewing can seem a thankless task in anonymity. In a closed system, reviewers don't receive academic credit for the power and knowledge they invested to improve the quality of an authors work. Therefore, ceptance , and theHead & Face Medicine is to induce 'intra-interdisciplinary' thinking by bringing together the findings of different researchers from various specialties, all exploring the same target structure. The objective is to gain new insights from different views, to recognize patterns, to extract new thoughts, to recombine them and to bring new visions to life. Scientists have the ethical duty to publish their results as soon as possible, irrespective of whether or not the findings are negative, which means challenging current dogmas, tenets or opinions of experts. The internet, e-publishing, Open Access and open peer review turn a journal like Head & Face Medicine to a cross between a traditional journal and a data stream which can be queried, analyzed and processed with the aim to improve medical knowledge in the area of head and face medicine. We look forward to receiving your contributions.The vision of


The purpose of this article is to draw attention to current transgressions in scientific writing and to promote commitment to ethical standards and good science. All participants of any research project, particularly under interdiciplinary team approach, should not only play an active role on the management and carrying out of their study but also ensure that their study is not fraudulent. Manuscript fabrication, data and/or figure manupilation, piracy (plagiarism), sloppy research, and transgressions in authorship are reasons for loss of scientific value and records, retraction of articles, and application of a variety of sanctions. Because the identities of the reviewers are accessible, transgressions such as blocking the publication of a competitor or raking new ideas/methods from submissions, which are then rejected deliberately by licentious reviewers, are infrequent in the open peer-review process. Nonetheless, misconduct, fraud, and plagiarism is still unavoidable in scientific publishing, particularly in biomedicine, where the battle and commercial pay-offs are immense and many run for fame and fortune. As many developing countries and institutions strive for international recognition, institutional or even governmental financial rewards are offered to authors for high-profile papers [ quality . So far,The Journal of Cell Biology have claimed that up to 20% of accepted papers contained some questionable data, a rate that did not decrease since the journal instituted an editorial data-screening process [It is nice to be recognized as an innovative and distinguished scientist, but "only" through commitment in unhindered research undertaken for the "welfare of humanity" . Hwang a process . The sam process . One couHead & Face Medicine has been established as unambiguous justification of the contribution of each author in the submissions. Like many other journals, Head & Face Medicine also asks for competing interests (conflict of interest) from the authors in their submissions. The competing interests of the authors inculde financial, organizational, career and personal conflicts. Competing interests do not downgrade the scientific validity of the study, but exposes potential bias for involvement of the researcher(s) with any commercial product tested. A section relating to competing interests of the authors, therefore, appears in the guidelines for preparation of a manuscript for Head & Face Medicine.Another critical factor in scientific writing is authorship. With regard to its consequences on the scientific value of the study undertaken, this problem seems less important, but it is still widespread in universities and institutions. Authorship could be classified as coercion authorship, mutual support/admiration authorship, the gift authorship, the ghostwriter, and duplicate production authorship . As the Head & Face Medicine sincerely hopes not only senior researchers but also junior researchers and students who are committed to scientific research will also be committed to current ethical standards and good science. Ethical standards raise the bar of scientific quality and trustworthiness. We strongly encourage authors to support our journal with novel "intra-interdiciplinary" studies.We know that avoidance of scientific fraud is impossible solely by authorizing institutional or governmental boards to respond to allegations by performing sanctions. Education of research ethics and commitment to good science could drop the prevalence of deceitful papers. The Editorial Team of


Journal of Medical Case Reports fills this void. It is an online, open access journal dedicated to the publication of high quality case reports, and aims to contribute to the expansion of current medical knowledge.A case report provides important and detailed information about an individual, which is often lost in larger studies. Moreover, case reports can serve as an early warning signal for the adverse effects of new medications, or the presentations of new and emerging diseases. Although a number of medical journals publish case reports, these articles are underrepresented in the literature, and there has not been a journal specifically devoted to these valuable reports. Journal of Medical Case Reports we intend to create a dedicated home for these articles, which have the potential to contribute to and change clinical practice.Since antiquity, clinicians have learnt from their more experienced peers as well as from their own work with their individual patients . AccuratJournal of Medical Case Reports is open access, and therefore articles are freely and immediately available online, making this journal an important global resource. In line with our open access policy, authors retain the copyright of their work, allowing them to distribute their article as they please. In addition, all articles are archived in PubMed, PubMed Central, and also in repositories at the University of Potsdam in Germany, at INIST in France and in e-Depot, the National Library of the Netherlands' digital archive of all electronic publications. As the cost of publishing, maintaining and archiving research articles is not recouped through subscription charges, a standard article-processing charge (APC) is levied on articles that are accepted for publication. The APC is a flat charge, and no additional costs are incurred, for example, by the inclusion of colour figures.All content in Journal of Medical Case Reports will be aggregated into a structured case reports database in due course. The case reports database, currently in development, will also draw content from other sources, making it possible to search for patterns of drug reactions, or demographic data and disease information, across multiple case reports. We believe the database will become an important resource for clinicians, as well as academic, commercial and legislative organisations that monitor medication side effects, new and emerging diseases and changes in patterns of known diseases.All case reports published in Journal of Medical Case Reports invites submission of original case reports that expand the field of general medical knowledge. Case reports should be short (no more than 2000 words with a maximum of 10 references and 3 figures). We invite concise articles that fall into one of the following seven categories:1. Unreported or unusual side effects or adverse interactions involving medications2. Unexpected or unusual presentations of a disease3. New associations or variations in disease processes4. Presentations, diagnoses and/or management of new and emerging diseases5. An unexpected association between diseases or symptoms6. An unexpected event in the course of observing or treating a patient7. Findings that shed new light on the possible pathogenesis of a disease or an adverse effectJournal of Medical Case Reports will be subject to immediate screening by the in-house editorial team, and appropriate manuscripts will be sent for peer review. Accepted articles will be published online and indexed in PubMed immediately upon acceptance. For more information on the journal policies, please refer to the journal website [All manuscripts submitted to  website .Journal of Medical Case Reports.We hope you will join us in this exciting, new venture, and submit your next case report to Journal of Medical Case Reports and CH is an employee of BioMed Central, which publishes the journal.MK is the Editor-in-Chief of


Cerebrospinal Fluid Research. This editorial is to inform readers about the need and use of APCs and about the advantages of free open access publishing.Article processing charges (APCs) have recently been introduced for authors submitting papers to  Cerebrospinal Fluid Research in December 2004. Cerebrospinal Fluid Research is published by BioMed Central, an independent publisher committed to ensuring peer-reviewed biomedical research is Open Access. To fund this, from July 1st 2005 authors of articles accepted for publication will be asked to pay an article-processing charge (APC) of £330.00.It is now over six months since the launch of Cerebrospinal Fluid Research's Open Access policy were highlighted in a previous editorial [Traditionally, readers pay to access articles, either through subscriptions or by paying a fee each time they download an article. Escalating journal subscriptions and shrinking library budgets have resulted in libraries subscribing to fewer journals , and theditorial .Cerebrospinal Fluid Research's articles. Authors are asked to pay £330 if their article is accepted for publication. Waiver requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis, by the Editor-in-Chief. Authors can circumvent the charge if their institution becomes a 'member' of BioMed Central, in which case the annual membership fee covers the APCs for the authors of all BioMed Central journals at that institution for that year. Current members include NHS England, the World Health Organization, the US National Institutes of Health, Harvard, Princeton and Yale universities, and all UK universities [APCs will allow continued Open Access to all of ersities . Additioersities .Cerebrospinal Fluid Research does not levy additional page or colour charges on top of this fee. With the article being online only, any number of colour figures and photographs can be included, at no extra cost. Another common expense with traditional journals is the purchase of reprints for distribution, and the cost of these reprints is frequently greater than our APCs. Cerebrospinal Fluid Research provides free, publication-quality pdf files for distribution, in lieu of reprints.The APC pays for online submission and efficient peer review, for the article to be freely and universally accessible in various formats online, and for the processes required for inclusion in PubMed and archiving in PubMed Central, e-Depot, Potsdam and INIST. There is no remuneration of any kind provided to the Editor-in-Chief, to any members of the editorial board, or to peer reviewers; all of whose work is entirely voluntary. Although some authors may consider £330 expensive, it must be remembered that Cerebrospinal Fluid Research is not alone in the move to Open Access funded by APCs: many publishers now offer various "hybrid" forms where the authors are asked to contribute to the publishing costs. The Public Library of Science also has Open Access journals that are funded by grants and APCs of about US$1500 per article [Although several journals now offer free online access to their articles, this is different from Open Access (as defined by the Bethesda Statement ). Journa article . The higCerebrospinal Fluid Research to continue to publish attractive and important papers on outstanding research that will be accessible to everyone worldwide. We believe this process will bring together people in a vigorous field of research, and we hope you will support this progress by submitting your next article to this Open Access journal.By providing a forum for Open Access, APCs will enable


Journal in May, 2005. Here we explain why article-processing charges are important to maintain our Open Access journal.Readers in immunology are familiar with the importance of antigen presenting cells in mounting immune responses. For the purpose of this particular editorial article, however, the abbreviation APC will stand for article processing charges. The publisher will introduce APCs for this  Journal of Autoimmune Diseases is published by BioMed Central, an independent publisher committed to ensuring peer-reviewed biomedical research is Open Access – universally and freely available online to everyone, with authors retaining copyright, and the full text being archived in numerous internationally recognised free repositories [Journal of Autoimmune Diseases however, has taken this further, by making all its content Open Access. To fund this, authors of articles accepted for publication in the Journal will be asked to pay an article-processing charge (APC). In 2005, that charge will be 330 GBP.sitories . JournalTraditionally, readers pay to access articles, either through subscriptions or by paying a fee each time they download an article. Escalating journal subscription prices have resulted in libraries subscribing to fewer journals , and theJournal of Autoimmune Diseases' Open Access policy changes the way in which articles are published. First, all articles become freely and universally accessible online, and so an author's work can be read by anyone at no cost. Second, the authors hold copyright for their work and grant anyone the right to reproduce and disseminate the article, provided that it is correctly cited and no errors are introduced [Journal of Autoimmune Diseases are archived in PubMed Central [troduced . Third,  Central , the US  Central  in Germa Central  in Franc Central , the NatJournal of Autoimmune Diseases.Open Access has four broad benefits for science and the general public. First, authors are assured that their work is disseminated to the widest possible audience, given that there are no barriers to access their work. It has been shown that free online articles are more highly cited because of their easier availability . Second,Journal of Autoimmune Diseases does not levy additional page or colour charges on top of this fee, which can easily exceed 330 GBP. With the article being online only, any number of colour figures and photographs can be included, at no extra cost.The APC pays for the article to be freely and universally accessible in various formats online, and for the processes required for inclusion in PubMed and archiving in PubMed Central, e-Depot, Potsdam and INIST. Although some authors may consider 330 GBP expensive, it must be remembered that Authors will be asked to pay 330 GBP if their article is accepted for publication. Waiver requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis, by the Editor-in-Chief. Authors can circumvent the charge by getting their institution to become a 'member' of BioMed Central, whereby the annual membership fee covers the APC for all authors at that institution for that year. Current members include NHS England, the World Health Organization, the US National Institutes of Health, Harvard, Princeton and Yale universities, and all UK universities . No charJournal of Autoimmune Diseases to better serve the scientific community. We believe this change will benefit our readers and aid research in the field of autoimmunity.By providing a forum for Open Access, APC will enable


Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica [Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica was founded in 1959 as a traditional print journal, but has now taken the novel step of moving to the open access model already used successfully by our publisher, BioMed Central [Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica will be freely available online, and will continue to publish articles that encompass all aspects of veterinary research and medicine of domestic animals and wildlife. One of our aims is to close the gap between research in veterinary medicine and animal science, so we also welcome manuscripts from related fields within biology.Welcome to dinavica ! Acta Ve Central . Acta VeWhy 'open access'?Traditionally, readers pay to access research articles, either through subscriptions or by paying a fee each time they download an article. Escalating journal subscription charges have resulted in libraries subscribing to fewer journals , and theFrom a scientific point of view, a far better strategy is to offer all readers unrestricted access to the full articles. Such a strategy has at least three benefits. First, authors are assured that their work is disseminated to the widest possible audience and the authors are free to reproduce and distribute their work. Second, the information available to researchers will not be limited by their library's budget. Third, a country's economy will not influence its scientists' ability to access research.Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica will provide a quick and impartial closed peer-review process. The Editor-in-Chief/Deputy Editors will first examine manuscripts, and submissions meeting the journal's standards will then result in appropriate reviews  for each manuscript accepted after peer review (payable on acceptance). No charge is made for articles that are rejected after peer review. However, many colleagues will find that their institutions or funding agencies will cover the costs, or support publication at a discounted rate [To enable the journal to make all of its content open access, ted rate ,6.Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. The scientific value of an article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica can then be subject to the evaluation of the entire scientific community.I encourage colleagues to carefully weigh the scientific and financial arguments for open access and to submit articles to


Sismondo discusses how pharmaceutical companies and their agents shape multiple steps in the research, analysis, writing, and publication of articles. In extrThe New York Times [Annals of Internal Medicine article on Merck's “Advantage” trial of Vioxx omitted some trial participants' deaths. Distancing himself from the Annals article, first author Jeffrey Lisse said in an interview that “Merck designed the trial, paid for the trial, ran the trial…Merck came to me after the study was completed and said, ‘We want your help to work on the paper.’ The initial paper was written at Merck, and then it was sent to me for editing” [For example, as reported in rk Times , an Annaediting” .writing to the more general ghost management of medical research and publishing: when pharmaceutical companies and their agents control or shape multiple steps in the research, analysis, writing, and publication of articles. Such articles are “ghostly” because signs of their actual production are largely invisible—academic authors whose names appear at the tops of ghost-managed articles give corporate research a veneer of independence and credibility. They are “managed” because those companies shape the eventual message conveyed by the article or by a suite of articles. As discussed below, a substantial percentage of medical journal articles  are ghost managed, allowing the pharmaceutical industry considerable influence on medical research, and making that research a vehicle for marketing.Such incidents have provoked many commentaries about ghost writing in the medical press. This article enlarges the focus from ghost Ghost writing and honorary authorship are not in and of themselves scientific problems, though they become so when they shape science to meet particular interests . Some hoIt has been repeatedly and firmly established that pharmaceutical company funding strongly biases published results in favor of the company's products . Ghost mBecause ghost management is hidden, we cannot tell how common it is from published exposés. Current practices in the medical sciences legitimately allow people to serve as authors on the basis of narrow contributions. Therefore many near-honorary authors find little reason to feel uncomfortable with their roles. Fully honorary authors may not see enough of the process of the production of their articles to know that they are ghost managed. Finally, it is not in the interests of writers, authors, or sponsors and their agents to reveal ghost management processes; hence a number of the published accounts of ghost management have stemmed from legal proceedings and investigative journalism. So how common is ghost management?Much of the information on ghost writing does not help to answer this question. Surveys to quantify rates of ghost writing do not address the ghost management phenomenon, because management may not involve writing, and writing may not be managed ,21. HoweThe most solid information available on ghost management comes from the work of David Healy and Dinah Cattell. A lawsuit in which Healy was involved allowed access to a document listing 85 manuscripts on sertraline that were being coordinated for Pfizer by the medical education and communication company (MECC) Current Medical Directions (CMD) ,23. The More importantly, all of the manuscripts were being managed very carefully, as CMD was aware of submission dates, journals' requests for revisions, target dates for those revisions, and projected publication dates. Authors were not acting independently. The document is peppered with comments such as “First draft with author for review,” and “Manuscript submitted to American Journal of Psychiatry 7/98. Confidence intervals requested by journal. Revised manuscript resubmitted 9/98” . Most maThese 85 manuscripts became a significant portion of all of the articles published on sertraline. A general Medline search of 1998 to 2000 (performed December 2006) found 479 results with the keyword “sertraline,” and 211 with “sertraline” in the title. This suggests that between 18% and 40% of articles on sertraline in this key period were managed by Pfizer through this one MECC, large enough percentages to have substantial effects on the overall shape of the medical literature on this drug.Healy and Cattell claim that the CMD articles are uniformly positive about sertraline, and they note under-reporting of side effects in these articles. Compared to other articles on sertraline , the CMD articles were published in more prominent journals, had nearly twice as many authors per article, had authors who were on average twice as prolific, and garnered nearly three times as many citations  . ApparenWhile we cannot know all of the ways in which the CMD document represents other publication efforts, there is strong evidence that ghost management of medical research is common and is part of campaigns by pharmaceutical companies to publish favorable results and key marketing messages.A survey in 2001 identified 182 MECCs in the United States, up from 153 in 1998 . A numbeIn preparing this article, I spent six hours searching web pages for MECCs offering publication planning or similar or overlapping services to the pharmaceutical industry, and found 23 (list available from the author). This is not an estimate of the number of such firms, but indicates how common they are. There may be many more firms providing publication planning, including some not uncovered in this search, and some not advertising these services on the Internet. For example, CMD was not among the 23 found, as its current Web site lists only medical education and meeting services as core capabilities. Pharmaceutical companies also do publication planning in-house, though one industry source estimates that in-house planning makes up only 20% of this business . On the Pharmaceutical companies control an immense quantity of data. The industry provides twice as much funding for clinical trials and related research as do not-for-profit agencies . Of induIn a primer on publication planning, the director of one MECC defines the activity as: “gaining product adoption and usage through the systematic, planned dissemination of key messages and data to appropriate target audiences at the optimum time using the most effective communication channels” . These cComplete Healthcare Communications (CHC) claims on its banner that it “has honed the systems and skills needed to develop the intellectual heart of pharmaceutical marketing—the publication plan. The result for your product? A continuum of awareness, interest, and prescriber confidence” . CHC wilCHC includes among its clients Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Ortho Biotech, Wyeth, Schering-Plough, Shire, AstraZeneca, and other pharmaceutical companies. It provides testimonials from sponsors and authors. A Johns Hopkins author writes “Very nice outline! You guys are quite organized!! I think it's superb. Very fair and balanced. I'm not used to working with such excellent writers!” CHC claims to have written and submitted over 500 manuscripts, with an acceptance rate of 80%. CHC is able to achieve such a rate with resources far beyond the reach of most researchers: not only are all of its studies fully supported by the largest of pharmaceutical companies, but it boasts a team of 40 medical writers, editors, and librarians.Other agencies offer very similar services. As described in an article by three of its managers, the Medical Knowledge Group starts publication planning with a phase of exploring “key messages” and “author/journal options” before designing any publications to incorporate those messages . It thenIn addition to the publication planners, a much higher number of medical writing companies and individual writers create articles and presentations without engaging in broader publication planning; these may be adjuncts to publication planners. To provide an indication of the scale, the American Medical Writers Association boasts a membership of more than 5,000 ; judgingSeveral of the publication planning firms identified are owned by major publishing houses. For example, Excerpta Medica is “an Elsevier business” and writes that its “relationship with Elsevier allows… access to editors and editorial boards who provide professional advice and deep opinion leader networks” . WoltersGhost management of medical journal publications is clearly a substantial business, employing thousands of marketers, writers, and managers. It is large enough that the industry has established the International Publication Planning Association. This organization, which appears to be dominated by pharmaceutical companies, organizes meetings, keeps a directory of experts, and gives awards to honor planners . In addiThe New York Times [Merck's ghost management of the Advantage trial paper was described as “an unusual practice” when it was reported in rk Times . Given trk Times . Even ifArticles in medical journals have real effects upon physician prescribing behavior, which is why pharmaceutical companies invest so much in their publication. Journal articles are heavily used in detailing, to validate claims and rebut worries. Even independent of detailers, responsible physicians and medical researchers search the literature to gather evidence about the best treatments. Published scientific articles are the sources of medical information with the highest authority. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses almost all start with the published literature—so even fully independent reviews are influenced by ghostly activities. Therefore, the ghost management of journal articles is a step in the intervention into medical practice.There are no straightforward solutions, short of large changes to the nature of medical publishing and/or research, changes that would effectively sequester pharmaceutical company funding from research and publishing  or from Peer review has not been proven to be an effective tool for quality control, so we cannot rely on journals' peer review systems to guard against biases created by ghost managing . Indeed,Universities and academic health centers should prohibit contracts that allow sponsors to draft, edit, or suppress articles, or that allow sponsors to keep data from authors; they should even prohibit sponsors from facilitating publication. Universities should also take disciplinary action against investigators who serve as authors on ghost-managed articles. Meanwhile, investigators need to be aware of the mechanisms of ghost management of work that goes under their names, and to refuse to participate. Perhaps they need to be more modest about how many articles they can publish, and more realistic about the amount of effort, legwork, and/or creativity it takes to publish an article. In a presentation on its Web site, the MECC Envision mentions the “author dilemma: Who are they? Why are they authors? What is their role?”  All auth


Their most universal quality is diversity.”—Michel de Montaigne, French essayistThe global scope of pathogen research—a dynamic field that spans basic science, public health, epidemiology, vaccines, infectious diseases, genetics, and population dynamics—ensures that a great diversity of opinions and perspectives exist within its community of scientists. The verbal expression of such points of view, shared expertise, and opinion for its own sake may be readily witnessed at any scientific or faculty meeting. But in research articles as well as in reviews, it seems scientists are increasingly discouraged from broad speculation or from making statements that border on the provocative. This trend risks dampening the rigor and enthusiasm found in the vibrant pathogen research field.PLoS Pathogens is intended to provide a place for pathogen researchers to express their views on topics ranging from issues in experimental science to those involving science and public-health policy, education and training, and funding. And it is also a forum in which colleagues can bring another view in response to a stated opinion or observation, thus enriching the dialogue.Thus, it was the opinion of the editorial board of this new open-access journal that it was important to provide an Opinions forum. We recognize that there are important questions we can raise, and points of view to put forth—especially at a time when the field is advancing in many and key directions. The Opinions section of PLoS Pathogens community; therefore, it will be important that each piece provides specific examples supporting the points made that relate to pathogenesis in the broader sense, rather than focusing exclusively on a single pathogen.Our view for the Opinions section is to include original, editorial-length pieces that convey a concise and well-stated point of view on a timely subject. We will encourage authors to rely heavily on their unique perspective as scientists in the field, and will strive to allow plenty of leeway for speculation and model building, more than for a regular research article or a review article. An important goal of Opinions is to reach the collective PLoS Pathogens can have an immediate and powerful effect on your colleagues in the pathogen research community and in the broader community of scientists. The open-access format of PLoS Pathogens ensures that Opinions are immediately accessible to the widest possible global audience to read, digest, and respond to.Opinions published in (marim@scripps.edu).While Opinion articles are typically solicited directly from potential authors by the Opinions editor and the editorial board, suggestions for topics of interest and import are welcomed, and should be directed to the Opinions editor, Marianne Manchester Published monthly online Invited and submitted articles are consideredTarget length of 1,000 words Subject to limited peer reviewAddressing topics of interest to the wider pathogen research community


Search for the truth is the noblest occupation of man; its publication is a duty. —Madame de Stael (1766–1817)Formats for reporting results from randomized clinical trials in peer-reviewed journals have remained virtually unchanged and unchallenged for the past 50 years . HoweverPublication (and non-publication) of trial results can be motivated by several factors. Research reports may affect clinical practice, inform patients, influence future research, and prevent duplication of effort. Many believe there is a moral obligation to report results of all trials that involve patients .Publication also has important secondary effects. These may explain existing patterns of publication and resistance to change—despite evidence that current systems are not the best. Authorship of papers in journals can establish reputations and enhance career prospects. Institutional or corporate reputations may also benefit. The productivity of academic departments is judged on their publication output, which also affects their chances of obtaining future funding. The peer-reviewed (and indexed) journal has thus become part of the process of academic appointments and promotions, which, in turn, has spawned the discipline of bibliometrics . And, ofThe traditional system of publishing trials in medical journals reflects many of the limitations of paper-based systems despite the advent of electronic publishing. In general, new media and the Internet have been used to modify existing systems rather than for dramatic redesign of the architecture of the medical evidence base. For example, papers may now be accessed from journal Web sites but the format of research articles and the ways in which findings are presented remain the same. While some journals allow additional material to be displayed electronically, most still impose strict size limits on research reports and simply use Web sites as a means of accessing documents that are identical to the print version. The result is that, while there have been some major changes such as the development of “open access” journals, information remains hard (or expensive) to access, scattered across many places, and difficult to synthesize. Producing and disseminating printed material can be slow, and journal peer-review often contributes further delays .Another problem with the existing system is that non-publication of negative trials and non-reporting of negative outcomes, coupled with redundant publication of positive findings, has led to systematic publication bias, which can undermine the reliability of medical evidence ,6,7.One of the most important initiatives aimed at reducing publication bias is trial registration  . One potSuppression of unfavourable findings will be apparent if all studies are registered at inception. But trial registration can prevent publication bias only if it is coupled with a commitment to make results from all studies available and a mechanism for implementing and policing this. Guidelines for pharmaceutical companies  and inveIn the era when print technology was dominant, publication was easy to define. The need for expensive equipment and expertise restricted entry into large-scale publishing activities. This was the golden age of the publisher. Within science and medicine, peer review also became established (despite limited evidence of its effectiveness and lack of agreement about its primary purpose) . Until rhttp://www.clinicalstudyresults.org).Following legal action against companies accused of suppressing unfavourable findings, several pharmaceutical companies have announced plans to make study findings available via Web sites ,15. The The World Health Organization (WHO), which has been coordinating discussion about trial registries, has also discussed guidelines for the posting of results. An initial working group suggested that the summary format used for regulatory reports might be used for posting results .  and results would highlight selective reporting and post hoc analyses.Electronic templates for results reporting should raise standards and improve searchability.Results could be posted on publicly accessible Web sites at minimal cost.Peer-reviewed journals should concentrate on interpretation, synthesis, commentary, and discussion.The standards for reporting randomized trials in journals have been raised by guidelines such as the CONSORT statement , yet theJournal articles using the traditional IMRAD format  combine objective study findings with subjective interpretation. While evidence of many other supposed benefits of peer review is weak, its ability to “tone down” conclusions and remove unfounded claims has been clearly shown . But peeThis model might also help resolve the ethical arguments about access to research. Funders, researchers, and readers increasingly demand access to clinical trial results for free, yet producing peer-reviewed journals is a costly business . If resuhttp://rctbank.ucsf.edu/). Based on such research, a Global Trial Bank has recently been established and aims to be “the most advanced computable repository of trial protocol and results information to promote biomedical discovery as well as transparency and accountability in clinical trial research” [While free text may serve readers well, it is not an efficient electronic storage medium. The most powerful, and some would argue the most efficient and transparent, method of making results available would be to provide raw (but anonymized) datasets for public scrutiny. It is now technically possible to store results in a computable databank as in the Trial Bank Project  than traditional peer-reviewed publication. Performing trials and handling data according to Good Clinical Practice requires considerable expertise and resources. This is currently reinforced by oversight from regulatory bodies  in the case of the pharmaceutical industry. The new model of publication might require similar policing systems, especially for non-industry-funded studies, and such systems would require considerable resources.Editors and publishers may be concerned about what will happen to their journals if they are no longer the primary vehicle for publishing clinical trial results. Some medical editors have already considered and even prophesied this scenario –28. UndeThe current system of academic credits and research assessment based on authorship of peer-reviewed articles would need to be changed. Entries on trial registers and results databases are currently anonymous. If electronic posting becomes the primary  method of publication, a fair and transparent system for acknowledging contributors will need to be devised. This should be viewed as an opportunity to replace traditional journal authorship systems, which are open to abuse . Better We are at the threshold of a new era of reporting clinical trial results. We need to develop an evidence-based system to ensure that data storage and dissemination technology are harnessed to produce the best outcome for all users. Given the huge sums spent on medical research, it is a scandal that we have invested so little in determining the most effective and efficient ways of disseminating findings. I urge funders, especially non-commercial ones such as the Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council (in the UK), and National Institutes for Health (in the US), to rise to this challenge. We also need to consider the best funding models for such systems that would optimize access to findings without creating barriers to non-commercially funded research. Changes in research reporting systems will have implications for the future of medical journals and for current systems of measuring research productivity. Given the established position of peer-reviewed journals, there is likely to be a gradual transition from the current model. This transition may be accelerated by influencers such as journal editors (if they are brave enough to embrace the change rather than resisting it), regulators, and legislators. With wide consultation and cooperation from all key players , we could produce a system that greatly enhances the efficiency, transparency, and power of the medical knowledge base. This is an opportunity we must not miss.


Biomedical Digital Libraries, have sensed their opportunity to change the existing paradigm of giving away our scholarship and intellectual property, only to buy it back for the privilege of knowing it can be read. Will biomedical digital library and informatics researchers understand their role in a new era of Open Access simply by desiring an immediate uninhibited global audience and recognizing the necessity of open access peer-reviewed literature to become self-sufficient?Alternative models of subsidizing scholarly publishing and dissemination have germinated and gathered momentum in the fertile soil of dissatisfaction. Like the stubborn spring dandelion that needs but a small crack in the sidewalk to flower boldly, the first flowers of Open Access in library literature, including  The role that the publisher, librarian, and faculty will play in resolving the crisis has not been determined. Because of the potential impact of reduced collections on the mission of the health sciences center library, each group has a stake in working to contain the rise in scholarly journal prices and to stabilize the volatile journal market [l market .Biomedical Digital Libraries, have sensed their opportunity to change the paradigm: giving away our scholarship and intellectual property, only to buy it back for the privilege of knowing it can be read. Will you, the biomedical digital library and informatics researcher, understand their role in a new era of Open Access simply by desiring an immediate uninhibited global audience and recognizing the necessity of open access peer-reviewed literature to become self-sufficient?These words, written in 1990 before the invention of the graphical web browser or Adobe Acrobat™ , predictBiomedical Digital Libraries, published by BioMed Central [Biomedical Digital Libraries however, has taken this further, by making all its content Open Access. In order to provide tangible benefits – no page or digital content limits or colour charges, unlimited image and data storage, preparation and inclusion in redundant global digital repositories – from 01 April, 2005, authors of articles accepted for publication in Biomedical Digital Libraries will be asked to pay an article-processing charge (APC) of £330 . Authors from BioMed Central member institutions will not incur any APC. Many notable funding agencies authorize and encourage use of their grant resources to pay an APC [ Central , is univ Central . Biomedi€480, US$15. AuthoLibrarians and other information professionals are no doubt more familiar than most with the traditional access model: readers pay to view articles, either through library or personal subscriptions or by paying a fee each time they download an article. Escalating journal subscription costs have resulted in libraries subscribing to fewer journals . AlthougBiomedical Digital Libraries' Open Access policy changes the way in which peer-reviewed library research is published: following blinded peer review, all accepted articles are accessible online without the barrier of subscription or cost, and the author(s) retain copyright for their work and grant anyone the right to reproduce and disseminate the article [Biomedical Digital Libraries' articles are archived in PubMed Central [ article . Shortly Central , the US  Central  in Germa Central  in Franc Central , the NatBiomedical Digital Libraries' articles. Although some authors may consider an APC of £330  to be an economic hardship, it must be remembered that Biomedical Digital Libraries does not levy additional processing charges on top of this fee. With the article being digital from birth, any amount of colour figures, photographs, and digitized video recording can be included with submissions.APCs will support the future publication of biomedical library and informatics articles with conscious attention to peer review and immediate impact on professional practice. open access to all of Free Medical Journals [Many libraries under increasing budgetary constraints feel indebted to websites like Journals  which ofJournals ). JournaJournals . The higBy providing an unimpeded forum for authors that wish to maintain their intellectual property, APCs will enable Biomedical Digital Librariesto serve the individual content creator in the global library and informatics communities. We believe electronic publishing formats will benefit library and informatics practice and aid information science research, and we hope you will submit your next article to our protocol for blind peer review, which has without a doubt improved the organization and presentation of every submission so far.Biomedical Digital Libraries solicit their peers and colleagues for evidence-based, quality research. In our editorial model, both authors and editorial reviewers declare their competing interests, especially any related to the APC. If you would like advice on what to declare, and how to declare it, please feel free to ask us prior to submission. Many authors have some form of competing interest, conscious or not. A declaration of a competing interest reminds the reader that an awareness of potential influence can help to distinguish an appearance of a relationship from actual manipulative intent.More than 40 volunteer editorial staff members of The Editor declares his affiliation with one of 519 BioMed Central institutional members in 40 countries that provide a reasonable alternative to direct individual APC revenue.APC article-processing chargeHINARI Health InterNetworkInstitute for Scientific and Technical Information)INIST INstitut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique (PLOS Public Library of Science


Four years ago, the Nobel prize in chemistry celebrated chemists' achievements in asymmetric catalysis – and even since then the face of catalysis is changing, with for example metathesis and organocatalytic methods constantly breaking into new areas. Synthesis is changing too – it is arguably now a matter of when, rather than whether, a complex new compound can be made, and this new found confidence means that the choice of target is more important than ever. Chemical genetics is standing up to this challenge – which molecules do we make out of the billions we could make? In the past nature told us, and to some extent she still holds our hands  while we choose. But not only are organic molecules being made to interact with biological systems, but whole systems of supramolecular complexity are being built from scratch: para-biologies built, just like the original kind, out of organic chemistry. The synthesis of molecular motors, or sensors, of springs and levers makes possible this new molecular engineering at the nanometre scale for eventual uses which only the future will tell.The creative science of Organic Chemistry is one of the few which has the power constantly to rejuvenate itself, because almost uniquely it studies what it also creates. The flourishing of organic chemistry during the 20Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry. Unlike almost all other journals in chemistry, the Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry is an open access journal – all issues are fully and permanently available online to all, there is no subscription charge, and the copyright remains with the authors of the articles.Expanding scientific horizons are being matched by expanding geographical horizons: research is global, and many countries, particularly in Asia, are investing in the development of chemistry as never before. It is within this environment of expanding scientific horizons that we are now launching, and presenting to you, the Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry must be one in which authors are proud to publish their work, and not only because it is open access. We are committed to excellence in refereeing through the use of rigorous peer review, and our broad and experienced Editorial Advisory Board will assist us in maintaining the quality of the journal's output.An historic mission of the Beilstein-Institut has been to improve the quality of information in organic chemistry. Consistent with this mission it is the aim of the Institute to publish a high quality journal that will in due course stand comparison with the best in chemistry. The The advent of internet-based online publishing provides a great opportunity to restore power to the researcher, both as an author and as a reader. As authors you are able to see your work published more quickly and disseminated more widely; you are also in a stronger position to protect your intellectual property rights than in a print world where access was controlled by the publisher. As readers you have potentially greater access to more research information than ever before. The open access model is already well established in the life sciences and the Beilstein-Institut is pleased to offer a journal to serve research chemists in the same way.As online journals develop it is inevitable that access models will evolve with them. The open access model adopted by the Beilstein-Institut may not be applicable to all, but it will offer effective refereeing, rapid publication, worldwide dissemination and permanent archiving: and it does so while allowing the author to retain copyright. To be successful in the long-term other access models will probably have to do likewise. What form they will take only the future can tell. What we can say now is that the time when access to scientific information was granted only to those who could afford high subscription prices, and where authors had to surrender their intellectual property rights, is drawing to a close.Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry will therefore publish both short and long papers accompanied by appropriate experimental data as standard, allowing flexibility in style that was never possible under the now-outdated regime of "communications" and "full papers".Online publishing offers many further advantages beyond the rapidity offered  by electronic handling of manuscripts right up to the point of publication. Online versions of most other journals are still bound by the need for consistency with a printed equivalent. But for the purely online Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry, colour, video files, and hyperlinking pose no problems. Additional information such as experimental or spectroscopic data assisting the reader can, and will, be provided liberally. An unfortunate disadvantage of online journals is the loss of that age-old habit of page-flicking – glancing through an issue for something that catches the eye. We have therefore introduced, in an attempt to recapture the value of old-style browsing, the "album" facility: a collection of representative structures or images from a paper, more extensive and less prescriptive than the graphical abstract, which can be scrolled through much as crisp pages of white paper would be flicked. Further unique features, such as the ability to add refereed corrections and comments to published papers, will appear soon.Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry's pedigree, as a product of the Beilstein-Institut, will ensure its durability and quality, but it also stands as a vibrant new journal in a rejuvenating science. We look forward to your free and frequent participation in this exciting project as readers and authors.The Jonathan ClaydenEditor in Chief


Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research [We are proud to introduce Research , a new fAnnals of Surgical Innovation and Research (ASIR) allows the immediate publication of accepted articles and the presentation of large amounts of data, multimedia files and supplemental information.Open access provides an unparalleled opportunity to present information to specialists and the public. The online appearance of But do we really need another journal in the field of medicine?Yes we do, because this open access journal will be accessible to everyone, and not just those with access to a library with a subscription. As such, ASIR will help to increase public interest in, and support of, research. Many major founders, such as the NIH and the Wellcome Trust, now have policies to encourage grant holders to release their research to the public as soon as possible after publication -4. TheseA country's economy will not influence its researchers' ability to access articles in ASIR, because resource-poor countries (and institutions) will be able to read the same material as wealthier ones ).Our ambitious aim is to function as an ideal bridge to close the gap between the revolution in surgical innovations and research, especially in minimal invasive surgical technology, and to help surgeons at the front line of patient care. The journal tries to centralize new knowledge in one forum to give a quick and comprehensive review over new innovations and relevant research. The scope of the journal is to advance the quickly developing field of new surgical techniques and innovations in a more and more technically demanding field. It offers an opportunity to publish large datasets, large numbers of illustrations and even movies, and therefore to act as the primary source for surgical innovations to be used by clinicians and researchers.Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research just such a journal, and this is an exciting challenge. Assisting me in this new venture is an editorial board, which consist of members out of 14 different countries, many of them true leaders, others very enthusiastic and soon to be.We recognize the need for a dynamic forum that fosters the exchange of ideas across the entire surgical community, a journal that is open access and online. We now have an opportunity to make Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research to become an exciting forum for surgical research and innovation, we need you to contribute your most innovative and significant work in your field. In exchange, Annals of Surgical Innovation and Research will provide a fast, fair, and constructive review process; the highest quality production values; and a dedicated team of professional scientific editors, who are willing to discuss your research. All manuscripts are reviewed on the basis of scientific merit and held to the highest standards of excellence and editorial consistency. Upon acceptance they will be immediately available in PubMed and indexed by several other services.For Molecular Cancer [I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge our Editorial Board  for their Cancer , who gui


Source Code for Biology and Medicine, a new journal for publication of programming source code used in biology and medicine. Source Code for Biology and Medicine is an open access independent journal published by BioMed Central. We describe the journal aims, scope, benefits of open access, article processing charges, competing interests, content and article format, peer review policy and publication, and introduce the Editorial Board.This editorial introduces  Source Code for Biology and Medicine is a peer-reviewed open access, online journal that publishes articles on source code employed over a wide range of applications in biology and medicine. The aim of the journal is to publish source code for distribution and use in the public domain in order to advance biological and medical research. Through this dissemination, it may be possible to shorten the time required for solving certain computational problems for which there is limited source code availability or resources. Fundamentally, the overarching computation-related goals of the journal are to:• Increase productivity among source code users working on problems of public and environmental health importance• Reduce discovery times in molecular and genomic sciences• Reduce search times for source code applied in biological and medical research• Provide a historical reflection of source code applied in various fields• Serve as a repository for source codeSource Code for Biology and Medicine includes workflow and source code for data integration, data fusion, gene regulatory networks, molecular pathway and drug discovery, protein structure, biological sequence analysis, signal processing, geospatial information systems, patient management systems, decision support systems, social network systems, environmental risk and dose modeling, supervised and unsupervised classification, text and media mining, and parametric/non-parametric numerical methods. Publications in Source Code for Biology and Medicine may involve the following areas:The scope of • Biometrics• Biostatistics• Biopatterns• Biophysics• Bioinformatics• Ecology• Environmental health• Health physics• Medical physics• Medical informatics• Physics in medicine• Psychometrics• Toxicology• Vital statisticsComputer algorithms have been the primary source of quantitative results in biology and medicine for decades. Unfortunately, publication of the specific codes used has never been a major enterprise, so there is not a large body of information on the implemented codes. Several journals on computers in biomedicine now exist; however, they are focused on algorithm design, results, and benchmarking, and not specifically on publication of the source code. An online open access journal which requires publication of the computer source codes used in biomedical applications meets a great and growing demand, since the journal would serve as a historical repository for code and also provide direct access to codes for future use. Direct access to source code can substantially accelerate scientific discovery in the biomedical disciplines.Source Code for Biology and Medicine does not require an annual subscription fee or online purchase of articles. Open access also guarantees that authors hold the copyright for their work and grant anyone the right to reproduce and disseminate the article. Open access articles are also archived in PubMed Central [Under the open access publishing model, all articles become freely and universally accessible online, which means that access to articles in  Central  as well  Central  in Germa Central  in Franc Central , the NatPNAS from June 8, 2004 to December 20, 2004. Using a logistic regression model, and controlling for potential confounders, the odds ratio for citation of open access PNAS articles 4–10 months after publication compared with non-Open-Access PNAS articles was 2.1 . The odds ratio increased to 2.9  for 10–16 months after publication. Invariably, open access results in more downloads and citations, and can therefore increase Impact Factor [There are many benefits of open access publishing. These include the widest dissemination of published work with few barriers, which casts a wider net than print and online subscription-based journals. Recently, Eysenbach  studied t Factor . Online Source Code for Biology and Medicine. APCs defray costs for world-wide barrier-free access to peer-reviewed papers, developing and maintaining electronic tools for peer review and publication, preparation of papers in various formats for on-line publication, securing citation inclusion in PubMed, inclusion in PubMed Central archives, inclusion into CrossRef for citations in other electronic journals. APCs also ensure transparency and allow publishers to compete to provide the best service at the best price. By coupling the cost of publication to research budgets, APCs ensure that the journal publishing system can scale to cope with an ever-increasing volume of research.An article processing charge (APC) is required for each article accepted for publication in Many institutions  and reseSource Code for Biology and Medicine are academic researchers at non-profit universities mostly supported by Government research grants. As such, there is no conflict of interest during the review process or in the publication of articles appearing in Source Code for Biology and Medicine. Overall, the Editors-In-Chief and Editorial Board members are genuinely interested in publishing high-quality articles on computation in the biological and medical fields for the non-profit reader community.The Editors-in-Chief and the majority of Editorial Board members of Source Code for Biology and Medicine are as follows:The types of articles published in Research article: describes novel implementation of source code used for acquiring new results not previously published. Requires benchmarking with other algorithms and submission of complete source code files with compiled executables, libraries, or class modules (object-oriented programming is the preferred programming style).• Methodology article: describe first-time publication of source code for a common application for which code is not widely available in peer-reviewed biomedical literature. Requires submission of complete source code files with compiled executables, libraries, or class modules.• Brief reports: Provide a synopsis of an applied algorithm without publication of the source code.• Software reviews: covers the application of a published workflow or algorithm.• Source Code for Biology and Medicine should be formatted using the following section headers:Manuscripts for Research or Methodology articles submitted to • Title page• Abstract (350-word limit)• Introduction/Background• Methods• Results and Discussion• Conclusions• System and Programming Language Requirements• Copyright, Trademarks, Licensing, and Registration Requirements• Availability• Competing interests• Authors' contributions• Acknowledgements• References• Figure legends (if any)• Tables and captions (if any)Description of additional data files• ○ Source Code Listing○ Bundled Data Description (if any)○ Examples Runs (if any)These sections may contain subsections. For example:Methods○ Particle energy binning (histograms)○ Computation of factorial momentsSource Code for Biology and Medicine aims at a turnaround time for manuscript reviews of two weeks. All manuscripts will be reviewed anonymously by at least two referees. Review criteria include scope and originality; linguistic quality; comprehensiveness in background history; review of previous research with references, completeness in descriptions of data and samples used and methods implemented; discussion of results in connection with data used and results from other studies; benchmarking with other algorithms using simulated and/or empirical data sets; comparison with other codes; referencing and citations; and adequacy of tables and figures. A description of availability is required. Acceptance/rejection criteria are: accept without change, accept with minor modifications, review after modifications, or reject (unsuitable for publication).Source Code for Biology and Medicine, and will be indexed shortly thereafter in PubMed and PubMed Central.Once an article is accepted for publication, it will be published online immediately in Source Code for Biology and Medicine can be viewed online [The membership of the Editorial Board for d online .


Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses  “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards . Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. Authors of scholarly publications increasingly cite  Web pages and other Web-accessible documents in their articles. These cited materials may include for example descriptions of organizations on websites, “grey” research reports which have been published as Web page or Portable Document Format (PDF) files on the Web, online questionnaires, or even data files accessible for example through national statistics websites. As a general rule, published research should be transparent, replicable and falsifiable, and readers should have access to the cited materials, ideally seeing exactly the version authors saw when they cited the material. Yet, cited Web documents are at risk to be changed or even to disappear overnight, being unavailable for future generations of scholars. The unstable nature of Web references is increasingly recognized as a problem within the scientific community, and has been the subject of recent research and science policy discussions -8. It alIn journals like JMIR, where authors refer to Web services and online information perhaps more often than in other journals, the problem of “link rot” (“broken” links) in the references is particularly pertinent.http://www.webcitation.org), which is designed to permanently archive and retrieve cited Internet references. This tool can be used by authors, readers, editors and publishers. It is free of charge for individual scholars (authors and readers), with participating publishers ultimately carrying the operating costs through a membership fee, similar to the CrossRef model, which is a not-for-profit consortium of publishers working on crosslinking between “traditional” journal references which carry a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). The WebCite consortium complements the CrossRef system as it caters to “non-traditional” cited material which does not carry a DOI, and which is therefore typically not permanently preserved in libraries or systems like the LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Save) project at Stanford University [To prevent “link rot” in scholarly references, JMIR is now among the first journals to adopt a new technology called WebCite  cited URLs preferably before submitting a manuscript . This ennot necessary to cache electronic journal articles if they have a DOI, as it can be assumed that these are permanently preserved in libraries. However, free articles from e-journals which appear not to be available in libraries, those without an ISSN and/or a DOI should be archived in case they vanish).On the first level, the caching process can be initiated by the author of a manuscript wishing to cite a Web page , which the author should cite in the references section instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live link.Alternatively, authors may also use a WebCite bookmarklet. A bookmarklet is a small JavaScript program that can be stored as a URL within a bookmark in most popular web browsers, or within hyperlinks on a Web page. The WebCite bookmarklet can be downloaded from the WebCite server and saved to the bookmarks (“favourites”) folder of any Web browser, so that the author can take a snapshot by selecting the bookmarklet whenever he encounters a Web page he might later want to cite.Other third-party vendors may develop further tools such as browser plug-ins or add-ons to reference management software.Authors may also cache multiple URLs by initiating a “combing” of a manuscript for URLs (currently this only works for HTML manuscripts). A request to comb the outbound links from a given HTML manuscript leads the WebCite server to present a checklist of outbound links from a manuscript to the user, who can then choose to archive the content of any of the outgoing links. This method is intended to be used during the prepublishing phase of manuscript preparation, in order to capture the content of cited Web pages which the author may have not archived with WebCite during their primary Internet search and writing up of the article. This method is deficient in that the captured version of the cited page may differ from the version the author intended to cite if it has changed between the original access date and the article's processing date. However, in cases where the original author did not include WebCite backed links for their references, this is nonetheless a better approach than simply not caching references at all.Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on the Web document(s). They may also put the WebCite bookmarklet as a link on the page(s) they expect to be cited. In the future, cited authors will also be able to retrieve WebCite statistics as an impact measure from webcitation.org.Once the page(s) in question have been cached by WebCite, they can be accessed by users and publishers through the webcitation.org server, usually – if implemented by the publisher - just by clicking on a WebCite link next to the reference in question , or by URL and date.Retrieval of a cached document by explicit WebCite ID (snapshot ID) is the preferred way to retrieve a specific snapshot. Every item added to the WebCite database  is assigned a unique numeric ID. These IDs are unique, unambiguous and idempotent, and thus represent the ideal way of querying a given resource cached by WebCite. However, the use of this method requires knowing the ID for a given resource, and so it can not be used without premeditation. Upon completion of an archiving request, WebCite sends an email to the user who requested the archiving operation  containing the WebCite link with the unique ID.Also possible is retrieval by URL and date. When queried in this manner, WebCite finds all cached versions of the given URL, and sorts them by proximity to the given date. Although this allows for a certain “fudge factor” with timestamps, it also means that these types of queries are inherently ambiguous, and are not guaranteed to be idempotent across queries. As such, these queries are intended to be used when the user has no information in hand other than the URL to query, and possibly the approximate date of the snapshot they would like to see.The last option, by URL and citing article (identified through its DOI), is the preferred way many publishers may implement a WebCite link. This method allows for publishers which use WebCite as part of their (pre-)publishing workflow to easily create WebCite queries for their cached references with minimal coordination with WebCite before publishing. Publishers submit the citing articles (as XML) shortly before, on or after publication to WebCite, which automatically caches cited URLs. These queries are unambiguous, but are not necessarily guaranteed to be idempotent (the content of the URL may be recached by multiple submissions of a given page for combing).Journal editors and publishers can use WebCite at three different stages: At the (pre-)submission stage, the copyediting stage, and the publication stage. Ideally, an editor or publisher works with WebCite at all three stages.On the first level, editors should ask their authors to cache all cited URLs “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to the journal, by adding a respective note to their “Instructions for authors”  to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already.On the third level , publishers can submit the raw citing article to WebCite for processing. Ideally, this submission is done via file transfer protocol (FTP), and uses a well defined (preferably XML based) schema for article data. The exact dialect used for this purpose should be agreed on ahead of time by the publisher and WebCite. Currently, WebCite supports (X)HTML documents, NLM Journal Publishing DTD documents, and BioMed Central Article DTD documents. Adding new document types to this list is a straightforward process, and can be undertaken on a publisher by publisher basis by providing WebCite with a document DTD and sample document for testing.While the first two levels are currently free of charge for publishers, the third level requires that the publisher becomes a member of the WebCite consortium.A fourth option on how a publisher can use WebCite is retrospective archiving. WebCite also works as a focused crawler, and can – in collaboration with publishers - automatically comb citing articles “retrospectively” for cited URLs. The focused crawler can also be pointed to domains hosting academic journals, which have previously not asked authors to “WebCite” references before submission. Retrospective archiving has the obvious limitation that by the time references are being “WebCite archived” they may have disappeared already.In a pilot test of the WebCite focussed crawler, WebCite analyzed 280752 references from 8381 articles published in all BioMed Central journals from August 1997 to April 5, 2005. 6627 (2.4%) of these references were “pure” URL citations , of which 4919 were unique. 1571 cited an entire domain (i.e. a website as opposed to a specific webpage). 2938 cited a HTML page, 222 a PDF file, and 15 txt/doc files. Obeying a variety of robot-exclusion standards and “no-archive”/”no-cache” metatags or copyright restrictions, WebCite succeeded to archive 3198/4919 (65%) Web pages. 500 were not cached due to robot exclusions, but only 8 had a no-archive and 7 had no-cache restrictions. The remaining Web pages could not be cached because they were already inaccessible or had disappeared.Due to the limitations of retrospective caching, prospective archiving of cited references by authors or publishers at the time the manuscript is written or published is the preferred way to solve the problem of unstable and dynamically changing Web citations. Since its official launch in October 2005, almost 200 journals are already using WebCite on a routine basis.Two of the most frequently asked questions about WebCite concern copyright issues and long-term preservation issues.First, how does WebCite deal with copyright? Caching and archiving Web pages is widely done , and is not considered a copyright infringement, as long as the copyright owner has the ability to remove the archived material and to opt out. In order to opt out, certain machine readable Internet standards are in use, such as robot exclusion standards, as well as no-cache and no-archive tags, which are all honoured by WebCite. Thus, Web authors of copyrighted material who do not want their work cached or permanently preserved can explicitly exclude it from being archived simply by including these standard tags. In addition to honouring the respective Internet standards, copyright owners of an archived Web page also may request manual removal. In the vast majority of jurisdictions, caching Web pages would also considered “fair use”, in particular because 1) usually only one Web page as part of a larger collection (a website) is quoted, 2) because the webcited document is usually “unpublished” in traditional venues, hence there is no economic impact, with the vast majority of cited authors actually benefiting from the citation, 3) because the webcitation is used in the context of research.Despite these arguments it has to be acknowledged that copyright legislation and jurisdiction in this area are complex and in a state of flux, and part of a future iteration of WebCite may include a comprehensive licensing management system, allowing to pay royalties to authors of archived material, should they wish so.Secondly, how can scholars and publishers who opt to use WebCite be sure that the webcitation permalinks themselves will never be broken, that webcitation.org will never disappear? The answer is threefold: First, through the largest possible degree of “openness”: All WebCite code is Open Source, and all documentation is licensed under Creative Commons licenses. Secondly, through collaborations with libraries and consortia interested in preservation of digital material, who may act as a curator, custodian or trustee for the WebCite project. These long-term preservation partners may have agreed to hold backups of the service and to legally assume the domain name, all intellectual property such as trademarks, and the service itself, should for any reason the original WebCite service go out of business. Thirdly, the WebCite consortium will eventually be owned by (or through a membership scheme run by) publishers, who all have a vested interest in keeping the service alive.Widespread adoption of the WebCite technology among scholars, editors and publishers will not only solve the problem of inaccessible cited documents, but also open up further possibilities, such as the building – in analogy to the "Science Citation Index" (SCI) – a global “WebCite Index” which has been proposed as early as in 1998 . Such an