Editors’ Picks 2015: Part Seven

Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescription of medicines This week we have been looking at some of our staff editors’ favourite articles from 2015. These papers have covered a variety of important issues in medical research, from the transparency of clinical trials to the publication of negative findings. Our final editors’ pick takes us to Ireland, […]

Read More…

Editors’ Picks 2015: Part Six

The 2D:4D digit ratio and autism risk: is there an association? In December we surveyed our staff editors to tell us about their favourite articles from 2015. Our penultimate editors’ pick investigates the relationship between autism risk and a putative marker of testosterone exposure: the 2D: 4D digit ratio. In spite of large investments in […]

Read More…

Editors’ Picks 2015: Part Five

How well reported are interventions in systematic reviews? In December we surveyed our staff editors to tell us about their favourite articles from 2015. Part 5 focuses on another important editorial issue: the quality of reporting in systematic reviews. Clinicians and healthcare professionals often rely on systematic reviews and meta-analyses for information on how effective interventions […]

Read More…

Editors’ Picks 2015: Part Three

Combating Dissemination Bias in Clinical Research: Recommendations Tip of the iceberg: Dissemination bias includes publication bias, where published papers that are exposed to readers are biased in favour of particular characteristics (e.g. positive findings). Papers with other characteristics (e.g. negative findings) are not published and, as a result, remain out of view from readers.   […]

Read More…

Editors’ Picks 2015: Part Two

Clinical Trial Transparency: disclosures for new drugs below ethical and legal standards In December we surveyed our staff editors, who oversee and manage the peer review process, to tell us about their favourite articles from 2015. Part 2 looks at clinical trial transparency for new drugs.  The ability of medical and healthcare professionals to select […]

Read More…

Editors’ Picks 2015: Part One

2015 was another exciting year for BMJ Open, with over 1500 articles published. Since launching in 2011, we have published over 4000 articles, and we look forward to February, when the journal will celebrate its fifth anniversary. In December we surveyed our staff editors, who oversee and manage the peer review process, to tell us about […]

Read More…

BMJ launches new Chinese publishing portal: Q&A with David Wang and Huili Chen

Recently BMJ launched a publishing portal intended to help Chinese authors publish in BMJ’s portfolio of more than 60 journals, including BMJ Open. To help understand the motivations surrounding the portal, along with some of its content, we asked BMJ China’s Business Development Manager Huili Chen and the Deputy Editor of BMJ’s new journal Stroke […]

Read More…

OA Journals and Wikipedia: Open for collaboration

The theme of this year’s Open Access week is Open for Collaboration, with the aim of highlighting “the ways in which collaboration both inspires and advances the Open Access movement”. Recently BMJ Open published an article by Samy Azer and colleagues investigating whether articles in Wikipedia relating to cardiovascular disease were accurate enough to function as a suitable learning […]

Read More…