Trying not to fall victim to predatory science is becoming a skill in its own right. Not only are the number of predatory journals increasing but predatory science has started…
Coronavirus is a great topic of conversation in the media, but this is one of the best sources of information I have found, and its message is chilling. As a…
At a recent Summit in Miami, the emphasis for pharma, biotech and devices companies was overcoming the challenges of rare diseases.
Medicine is not an exact science, so patients are left to understand its nuances without a basic primer in statistics. How do patients understand risk and make their health care decisions? Part of it involves delusion.
‘Ghostwriting’ is a contentious issue among both medical practitioners and medical writers. Outside these circles, this issue typically only surfaces when either a politician decides to deplore it or a pharmaceutical company is implicated.
From e-books on Amazon.com to a new publishing format by the BMJ, e-reading is here to stay, and things will never be the same in medical publications.
You can prove just about anything with statistics. We’ve seen this in polls, politics, and policy. Even in health economics, caveat emptor.
We’ve all seen our share of silly headlines or sound bites, but they become a more serious matter when health or money is at stake.
In our world of bullet points, tweets, and soundbites, the celebrated Information Age has exploded into Information Hysteria for many would-be patients. We explore how patients can consider nuanced medical arguments in a world of reductive news and argumentation.
There’s been much rattling of chains lately on the subject of ghost writing in medical journals. David Woods, PhD, a writer and former journal editor discusses the lack of clarity on what is an author, a ghost author, and a guest author.