75-709: The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal and one of the oldest of its kind. It is also one of the world's highest-impact academic journals. It was founded in England in 1823. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles ("seminars" and "reviews"), editorials , book reviews , correspondence, as well as news features and case reports . The Lancet has been owned by Elsevier since 1991, and its editor-in-chief since 1995 has been Richard Horton . The journal has editorial offices in London , New York City , and Beijing . The Lancet
150-529: A monograph or in the proceedings of an academic conference . If the identities of authors are not revealed to each other, the procedure is called dual-anonymous peer review. Medical peer review may be distinguished in four classifications: Additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the American Medical Association to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to
225-420: A US "biotechnology" lab. Before the report's release, Sachs appeared on the podcast of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. , who has previously spread vaccine conspiracy theories. On the podcast episode, Sachs claimed that "Government officials such as Anthony Fauci "are not being honest" about the virus's origins". The published report included claims that "'independent researchers have not yet investigated' US labs, and said
300-473: A ban on tobacco in the United Kingdom in 2003, expressed support for Gaza during the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict , and issued an apology for sexist language. A December 2003 editorial by the journal, titled "How do you sleep at night, Mr Blair ?", called for tobacco use to be completely banned in the United Kingdom. The Royal College of Physicians rejected their argument. John Britton, chairman of
375-468: A bigger unreliable number”. Consequently, American Jewish Committee called The Lancet to "remove the letter from its website and, moving forward, exercise greater caution in selecting the claims it amplifies". The Lancet was criticised after it published a paper in 1998 in which the authors suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and autism spectrum disorder . In February 2004, The Lancet published
450-481: A certain threshold, and effective peer review requires a certain level of expertise. For non-professional writers, peer review feedback may be overlooked, thereby affecting its effectiveness. Elizabeth Ellis Miller, Cameron Mozafari, Justin Lohr and Jessica Enoch state, "While peer review is an integral part of writing classrooms, students often struggle to effectively engage in it." The authors illustrate some reasons for
525-501: A chilling effect on scientific research and the scientific community by implying that scientists who "bring up the lab-leak theory... are doing the work of conspiracy theorists"; the statement was deemed to have "effectively ended the debate over COVID-19's origins before it began". Further criticism of the letter was focused on the fact that, according to emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act , members involved in producing
600-565: A drug that they would not be able to get." The deputy editor of The Lancet responded to the criticism by arguing that no other measures besides a total ban would likely be able to reduce tobacco use. The smokers' rights group FOREST stated that the editorial gave them "amusement and disbelief". Director Simon Clark called the journal " fascist " and argued that it is hypocritical to ban tobacco while allowing unhealthy junk foods , alcohol consumption , and participation in extreme sports . Health Secretary John Reid reiterated that his government
675-557: A fundamental process in academic and professional writing, serving as a systematic means to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and credibility of scholarly work. However, despite its widespread use, it is one of the most scattered, inconsistent, and ambiguous practices associated with writing instruction. Many scholars questioning its effectiveness and specific methodologies. Critics of peer review in classrooms express concerns about its ineffectiveness due to students' lack of practice in giving constructive criticism or their limited expertise in
750-468: A journal initially launched in 2014 by parent publisher Elsevier, since 2015 supported by Cell Press and The Lancet , and eventually (July 2018) incorporated in The Lancet family journals together with its newly incepted sister journal eClinicalMedicine ( clinical research and public health research). In May 2019, The Lancet Digital Health published its first issue. Occasionally, the editors of
825-447: A letter signed by 27 scientists that stated: "We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin [...] [Scientists] overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife," adding: "Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus." The letter has been criticized for having
SECTION 10
#1732765370739900-479: A letter with an estimate of the number of direct and indirect deaths that may be caused in the coming months and years by the Israel–Hamas war . Using other conflicts, where the number of indirect deaths was 3 to 15 times higher than the number of direct deaths, the authors estimated the total number of conflict-related deaths by multiplying the reported deaths by five, and argued that in the coming months and years "it
975-415: A longitudinal study comparing two groups of students (one majoring in writing and one not) to explore students' perceptions of authority. This research, involving extensive analysis of student texts, concludes that students majoring in non-writing fields tend to undervalue mandatory peer review in class, while those majoring in writing value classmates' comments more. This reflects that peer review feedback has
1050-501: A means of critiquing each other's work, peer review is often framed as a way to build connection between students and help develop writers' identity. While widely used in English and composition classrooms, peer review has gained popularity in other disciplines that require writing as part of the curriculum including the social and natural sciences . Peer review in classrooms helps students become more invested in their work, and
1125-453: A potentially influential report contributing to further misinformation on such an important topic" and "It's true we've details to understand on the side of natural origins, for example the exact intermediate species involved, but that doesn't mean there's… any basis to the wild speculation that US labs were involved". In October 2023, The Lancet retracted two papers from 2008 and 2014 by surgeon Paolo Macchiarini . These papers, which discussed
1200-420: A statement by 10 of the paper's 13 coauthors repudiating the possibility that MMR could cause autism. The editor-in-chief, Richard Horton , went on the record to say the paper had "fatal conflicts of interest" because the study's lead author, Andrew Wakefield , had a serious conflict of interest that he had not declared to The Lancet . The journal completely retracted the paper on 2 February 2010, after Wakefield
1275-423: A step to increase quality control, the editors of The Lancet Group announced changes to the editorial policy in a comment titled "Learning from a retraction" which was published on September 22, 2020. In September 2022, The Lancet published the report of their "Covid-19 Commission" which was headed by Jeffrey Sachs , an economist with no medical background, who has pushed the conspiracy theory that Covid came from
1350-597: A study by the UK-based "PACE trial management group", which reported success with graded exercise therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy for ME/CFS ; a follow-up study was published in Lancet Psychiatry in 2015. The studies attracted criticism from some patients and researchers, especially with regard to data analysis that was different from that described in the original protocol . In a 2015 Slate article, biostatistician Bruce Levin of Columbia University
1425-448: A time and given an amount of time to present the topic that they have researched. Each speaker may or may not talk about the same topic but each speaker has something to gain or lose which can foster a competitive atmosphere. This approach allows speakers to present in a more personal tone while trying to appeal to the audience while explaining their topic. Peer seminars may be somewhat similar to what conference speakers do, however, there
1500-561: A visit and said that he "deeply, deeply regret[ted] the completely unnecessary polarization that publication of the letter by Dr Paola Manduca caused." Mark Pepys , a member of the Jewish Medical Association, criticised the letter as being a "partisan political diatribe" which was inappropriate for a serious publication. In addition, Pepys accused Richard Horton personally for allowing the publication of such political views. On 19 February 2020, The Lancet published
1575-525: Is a type of engineering review. Technical peer reviews are a well defined review process for finding and fixing defects, conducted by a team of peers with assigned roles. Technical peer reviews are carried out by peers representing areas of life cycle affected by material being reviewed (usually limited to 6 or fewer people). Technical peer reviews are held within development phases, between milestone reviews, on completed products or completed portions of products. The European Union has been using peer review in
SECTION 20
#17327653707391650-479: Is common in the field of health care, where it is usually called clinical peer review . Further, since peer review activity is commonly segmented by clinical discipline, there is also physician peer review, nursing peer review, dentistry peer review, etc. Many other professional fields have some level of peer review process: accounting, law, engineering (e.g., software peer review , technical peer review ), aviation, and even forest fire management. Peer review
1725-594: Is incorporated into the California Health and Safety Code Section 57004. Peer review, or student peer assessment, is the method by which editors and writers work together in hopes of helping the author establish and further flesh out and develop their own writing. Peer review is widely used in secondary and post-secondary education as part of the writing process. This collaborative learning tool involves groups of students reviewing each other's work and providing feedback and suggestions for revision. Rather than
1800-551: Is more time to present their points, and speakers can be interrupted by audience members to provide questions and feedback upon the topic or how well the speaker did in presenting their topic. Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. Peer review in writing is a pivotal component among various peer review mechanisms, often spearheaded by educators and involving student participation, particularly in academic settings. It constitutes
1875-554: Is not implausible to estimate that up to 186,000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza". The estimate quickly gained traction in both international and regional media, with some of the outlets misrepresenting the 186,000 figure as the actual number of deaths, rather than long-term cumulative estimate. As a result, three days after the publication, one of the letter's authors, Prof. Martin McKee , wrote that
1950-413: Is still a method used in classrooms to help students young and old learn how to revise. With evolving and changing technology, peer review will develop as well. New tools could help alter the process of peer review. Peer seminar is a method that involves a speaker that presents ideas to an audience that also acts as a "contest". To further elaborate, there are multiple speakers that are called out one at
2025-432: Is that peer review is not just about improving writing but about helping authors achieve their writing vision." Feedback from the majority of non-professional writers during peer review sessions often tends to be superficial, such as simple grammar corrections and questions. This precisely reflects the implication in the conclusion that the focus is only on improving writing skills. Meaningful peer review involves understanding
2100-479: Is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work ( peers ). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field . Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia , scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper 's suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by
2175-507: Is the only U.S. state to mandate scientific peer review. In 1997, the Governor of California signed into law Senate Bill 1320 (Sher), Chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any CalEPA Board, Department, or Office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. This requirement
2250-450: Is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field. Peer review is widely used for helping the academic publisher (that is, the editor-in-chief , the editorial board or the program committee ) decide whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected for official publication in an academic journal ,
2325-399: Is used in education to achieve certain learning objectives, particularly as a tool to reach higher order processes in the affective and cognitive domains as defined by Bloom's taxonomy . This may take a variety of forms, including closely mimicking the scholarly peer review processes used in science and medicine. Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing)
The Lancet - Misplaced Pages Continue
2400-566: The Journal Citation Reports , The Lancet Oncology has a 2021 impact factor of 54.433, The Lancet Neurology has 59.935, and The Lancet Infectious Diseases has 71.421. There is also an online website for students entitled The Lancet Student in blog format, launched in 2007. Since July 2018, The Lancet has also published two open access journals as part of The Lancet Discovery Science , dedicated to essential early evidence: eBioMedicine ( translational research ),
2475-877: The Journal Citation Reports , the journal has a 2023 impact factor of 98.4, ranking it first above The New England Journal of Medicine in the category "Medicine, General & Internal". According to BMJ Open , The Lancet is more frequently cited in general newspapers around the world than The BMJ , NEJM and JAMA . The Lancet also publishes several specialty journals: The Lancet Neurology ( neurology ), The Lancet Oncology ( oncology ), The Lancet Infectious Diseases ( infectious diseases ), The Lancet Respiratory Medicine ( respiratory medicine ), The Lancet Psychiatry ( psychiatry ), The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology ( endocrinology ), and The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology ( gastroenterology ) all of which publish original research and reviews. In 2013, The Lancet Global Health ( global health ) became
2550-534: The Vagina Museum . The journal's cover displayed a quotation from the review that referred to women as "bodies with vaginas". The quotation drew strong criticism on Twitter from medical professionals and feminists accusing The Lancet of sexism , arguing that this language was "dehumanising" and an "unhelpful" attempt at inclusivity. Horton later issued an apology on the journal's website. On July 5, 2024, The Lancet published in its Correspondence section
2625-467: The "Open Method of Co-ordination" of policies in the fields of active labour market policy since 1999. In 2004, a program of peer reviews started in social inclusion . Each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a "host country" lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant European-level NGOs . These usually meet over two days and include visits to local sites where
2700-871: The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. “That’s boring.” This is also particularly evident in university classrooms, where the most common source of writing feedback during student years often comes from teachers, whose comments are often highly valued. Students may become influenced to provide research in line with the professor’s viewpoints, because of the teacher’s position of high authority. The effectiveness of feedback largely stems from its high authority. Benjamin Keating, in his article "A Good Development Thing: A Longitudinal Analysis of Peer Review and Authority in Undergraduate Writing," conducted
2775-554: The National Institutes of Health has 'resisted disclosing details' of its work." Virologist Angela Rasmussen commented that this may have been "one of The Lancet's most shameful moments regarding its role as a steward and leader in communicating crucial findings about science and medicine". David Robertson from the University of Glasgow's Centre for Virus Research said that "It's really disappointing to see such
2850-429: The author's writing intent, posing valuable questions and perspectives, and guiding the author to achieve their writing goals. Magda Tigchelaar compares peer review with self-assessment through an experiment that divided students into three groups: self-assessment, peer review, and no review. Across four writing projects, she observed changes in each group, with surprisingly results showing significant improvement only in
2925-431: The classroom environment at large. Understanding how their work is read by a diverse readership before it is graded by the teacher may also help students clarify ideas and understand how to persuasively reach different audience members via their writing. It also gives students professional experience that they might draw on later when asked to review the work of a colleague prior to publication. The process can also bolster
3000-448: The college's tobacco advisory group, praised the journal for discussing the health problem, but he concluded that a "ban on tobacco would be a nightmare." Amanda Sandford, spokesperson for the anti-tobacco group Action on Smoking and Health , stated that criminalising a behaviour 26% of the population commit "is ludicrous." She also said: "We can't turn the clock back. If tobacco were banned we would have 13 million people desperately craving
3075-426: The confidence of students on both sides of the process. It has been found that students are more positive than negative when reviewing their classmates' writing. Peer review can help students not get discouraged but rather feel determined to improve their writing. Critics of peer review in classrooms say that it can be ineffective due to students' lack of practice giving constructive criticism, or lack of expertise in
The Lancet - Misplaced Pages Continue
3150-531: The control group. The results from the PACE trial have been used to promote graded exercise therapy ; however, these recommendations are now viewed by most public health bodies as outdated and highly harmful to ME/CFS patients. In May 2020, The Lancet published a metastudy by Mandeep R. Mehra of the Harvard Medical School and Sapan S. Desai of Surgisphere Corporation, which concluded that
3225-494: The debate so that it actually harms the overwhelming majority of patients." Starting in 2011, critics of the studies filed Freedom of Information Act requests to get access to the authors' primary data, in order to learn what the trial's results would have been under the original protocol. In 2016, some of the data was released, which allowed calculation of results based on the original protocol and found that additional treatment led to no significant improvement in recovery rates over
3300-489: The doctors responded by saying that the letter was a legitimate exercise in freedom of expression, while a second one stated that he had no knowledge about David Duke or the Ku Klux Klan. The editor of The Lancet , Richard Horton , said: "I have no plans to retract the letter, and I would not retract the letter even if it was found to be substantiated." However, Horton subsequently came to Israel's Rambam Hospital for
3375-531: The feedback with either positive or negative attitudes towards the text, resulting in selective or biased feedback and review, further impacting their ability to objectively evaluate the article. It implies that subjective emotions may also affect the effectiveness of peer review feedback. Pamela Bedore and Brian O’Sullivan also hold a skeptical view of peer review in most writing contexts. The authors conclude, based on comparing different forms of peer review after systematic training at two universities, that "the crux
3450-580: The first tissue-engineered trachea transplant, were found to contain fabricated information following an investigation by the Swedish National Board for Assessment of Research Misconduct. Before the 2023 retractions, in September 2015, The Lancet published an editorial titled, "Paolo Macchiarini is not guilty of scientific misconduct." The following persons have been editors-in-chief of the journal: Peer-reviewed Peer review
3525-473: The group's first fully open access journal . In 2014, The Lancet Haematology ( haematology ) and The Lancet HIV ( infectious diseases ) were launched, both as online only research titles. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health ( paediatrics ) launched in 2017. The three established speciality journals ( The Lancet Neurology , The Lancet Oncology , and The Lancet Infectious Diseases ) have built up strong reputations in their medical speciality. According to
3600-627: The inefficiency of peer review based on research conducted during peer review sessions in university classrooms: This research demonstrates that besides issues related to expertise, numerous objective factors contribute to students' poor performance in peer review sessions, resulting in feedback from peer reviewers that may not effectively assist authors. Additionally, this study highlights the influence of emotions in peer review sessions, suggesting that both peer reviewers and authors cannot completely eliminate emotions when providing and receiving feedback. This can lead to peer reviewers and authors approaching
3675-427: The letter as a "u-turn". In June of 2024, The Lancet wrote an op-ed stating that "SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that found its way into humans through mundane contact with infected wildlife" and that "doubling down on flawed assumptions in the face of growing evidence calls motivations into question." The 25 September 2021 edition of The Lancet included a review of an exhibition about the history of menstruation at
3750-581: The letter concealed their involvement "to creat[e] the impression of scientific unanimity" and failed to disclose conflicts of interest. After having published letters supporting only the natural origins theory , The Lancet published a letter in September 2021 from a group of 16 virologists, biologists and biosecurity specialists saying that "Research-related hypotheses are not misinformation or conjecture" and that "Scientific journals should open their columns to in-depth analyses of all hypotheses." The Times of India described The Lancet 's decision to publish
3825-629: The letter was Paola Manduca, Professor of Genetics at the University of Genoa in Italy. As reported in The Daily Telegraph , the letter "condemned Israel in the strongest possible terms, but strikingly made no mention of Hamas ' atrocities." According to Haaretz , the authors of the letter include doctors who "are apparently sympathetic to the views of David Duke , a white supremacist and former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard ." One of
SECTION 50
#17327653707393900-637: The letter “has been greatly misquoted and misinterpreted” and clarified that the 186,000 figure was “purely illustrative”. The letter has been criticized by the experts, such as the Chair of "Every Casualty Counts" network Prof. Michael Spagat , who wrote that the estimate "lacks a solid foundation and is implausible". Prof. Peter A. Singer , former Special Adviser to the Director-General of WHO, characterized letter's methods as "take one unreliable number and multiply by another unreliable number to get
3975-436: The malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine did not improve the condition of COVID-19 patients, and may have harmed some of them. In response to concerns raised by members of the scientific community and the media about the veracity of the data and analyses, The Lancet decided to launch an independent third party investigation of Surgisphere and the metastudy. Specifically, The Lancet editors wanted to "evaluate
4050-412: The origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper." The independent peer reviewers in charge of the investigation notified The Lancet that Surgisphere would not provide the requested data and documentation. The authors of the metastudy then asked The Lancet to retract the article, which was done on June 3, 2020. As
4125-424: The peer review process can be segmented into groups, where students present the papers to be reviewed, while other group members take notes and analyze them. Then, the review scope can be expanded to the entire class. This widens the review sources and further enhances the level of professionalism. With evolving and changing technology, peer review is also expected to evolve. New tools have the potential to transform
4200-441: The peer review process. Mimi Li discusses the effectiveness and feedback of an online peer review software used in their freshman writing class. Unlike traditional peer review methods commonly used in classrooms, the online peer review software offers a plethora of tools for editing articles, along with comprehensive guidance. For instance, it lists numerous questions peer reviewers can ask and allows for various comments to be added to
4275-471: The policy can be seen in operation. The meeting is preceded by the compilation of an expert report on which participating "peer countries" submit comments. The results are published on the web. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe , through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews , uses peer review, referred to as "peer learning", to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies. The State of California
4350-462: The process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. The clinical network believes it to be the most ideal method of guaranteeing that distributed exploration is dependable and that any clinical medicines that it advocates are protected and viable for individuals. Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term. In engineering , technical peer review
4425-518: The rapidly evolving field of digital health. The journal addresses the intersection of technology and health, focusing on how digital tools can inform and improve clinical practices and outcomes worldwide. The journal started in 2019 with the first issue published in May of that year. Rupa Sarkar is the editor-in-chief of the journal. The editorial team also includes deputy editor Diana Samuel, and senior editors Lucy Dunbar and Gustavo Monnerat. The journal
4500-524: The rest in volume ii . In 1990, the journal moved to a sequential volume numbering scheme, with two volumes per year. Volumes were retro-actively assigned to the years prior to 1990, with the first issue of 1990 being assigned volume 335, and the last issue of 1989 assigned volume 334. The table of contents listing on ScienceDirect uses this new numbering scheme. The Lancet includes editorial content and letters in addition to scientific papers, which have at times been controversial. For example, it called for
4575-584: The same team suggested that the violent death rate in Iraq was not only consistent with the earlier estimate, but had increased considerably in the intervening period (see Lancet surveys of casualties of the Iraq War ). The second survey estimated that there had been 654,965 excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war. The 95% confidence interval was 392,979 to 942,636. 1,849 households that contained 12,801 people were surveyed. In 2011, The Lancet published
SECTION 60
#17327653707394650-400: The selected text. Based on observations over the course of a semester, students showed varying degrees of improvement in their writing skills and grades after using the online peer review software. Additionally, they highly praised the technology of online peer review. The Lancet Digital Health The Lancet Digital Health is an open-access, peer-reviewed monthly journal dedicated to
4725-579: The self-assessment group. The author's analysis suggests that self-assessment allows individuals to clearly understand the revision goals at each stage, as the author is the most familiar with their own writing. Thus, self-checking naturally follows a systematic and planned approach to revision. In contrast, the effectiveness of peer review is often limited due to the lack of structured feedback, characterized by scattered, meaningless summaries and evaluations that fail to meet author's expectations for revising their work. Stephanie Conner and Jennifer Gray highlight
4800-622: The specialty journals will feel it incumbent upon themselves to name commissions about a certain particular issue of concern to a wide sub-audience of their readers. One example of this type of commission is the Lancet Infectious Diseases Commission on "Preparedness for emerging epidemic threats", which reported on its mandate in January 2020. Prior to 1990, The Lancet had volume numbering that reset every year. Issues in January to June were in volume i , with
4875-473: The type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g., medical peer review . It can also be used as a teaching tool to help students improve writing assignments. Henry Oldenburg (1619–1677) was a German-born British philosopher who is seen as the 'father' of modern scientific peer review. It developed over the following centuries with, for example, the journal Nature making it standard practice in 1973. The term "peer review"
4950-442: The value of most students' feedback during peer review. They argue that many peer review sessions fail to meet students' expectations, as students, even as reviewers themselves, feel uncertain about providing constructive feedback due to their lack of confidence in their own writing. The authors further offer numerous improvement strategies across various dimensions, such as course content and specific implementation steps. For instance,
5025-505: The writer or the editor to get much out of the activity. As a response to these concerns, instructors may provide examples, model peer review with the class, or focus on specific areas of feedback during the peer review process. Instructors may also experiment with in-class peer review vs. peer review as homework, or peer review using technologies afforded by learning management systems online. Students that are older can give better feedback to their peers, getting more out of peer review, but it
5100-616: The writing craft at large. Peer review can be problematic for developmental writers, particularly if students view their writing as inferior to others in the class as they may be unwilling to offer suggestions or ask other writers for help. Peer review can impact a student's opinion of themselves as well as others as sometimes students feel a personal connection to the work they have produced, which can also make them feel reluctant to receive or offer criticism. Teachers using peer review as an assignment can lead to rushed-through feedback by peers, using incorrect praise or criticism, thus not allowing
5175-488: The writing craft overall. Academic peer review has faced considerable criticism, with many studies highlighting inherent issues in the peer review process. The editorial peer review process has been found to be strongly biased against ‘negative studies,’ i.e. studies that do not work. This then biases the information base of medicine. Journals become biased against negative studies when values come into play. “Who wants to read something that doesn’t work?” asks Richard Smith in
5250-468: Was committed to helping people give up smoking. He added: "Despite the fact that this is a serious problem, it is a little bit extreme for us in Britain to start locking people up because they have an ounce of tobacco somewhere." In August 2014 and during the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict , The Lancet published an "Open letter for the people of Gaza " in their correspondence section. The principal author of
5325-538: Was first used in the early 1970s. Since 2017 a monument to peer review is at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. In academia, peer review is used to inform decisions related to faculty advancement and tenure. A prototype professional peer review process
5400-455: Was found to have acted unethically in conducting the research. The Lancet ' s six editors, including the editor-in-chief, were also criticised in 2011 because they had "covered up" the "Wakefield concocted fear of MMR" with an "avalanche of denials" in 2004. The Lancet also published an estimate of the Iraq War 's Iraqi death toll—around 100,000—in 2004. In 2006, a follow-up study by
5475-503: Was founded in 1823 by Thomas Wakley , an English surgeon who named it after the surgical instrument called a lancet (scalpel). According to BBC, the journal was initially considered to be radical following its founding. Members of the Wakley family retained editorship of the journal until 1908. In 1921, The Lancet was acquired by Hodder & Stoughton . Elsevier acquired The Lancet from Hodder & Stoughton in 1991. According to
5550-544: Was quoted saying "The Lancet needs to stop circling the wagons and be open", and that "one of the tenets of good science is transparency"; while Ronald Davis of Stanford University said: "the Lancet should step up to the plate and pull that paper". Horton defended The Lancet' s publication of the trial and called the critics: "a fairly small, but highly organized, very vocal and very damaging group of individuals who have, I would say, actually hijacked this agenda and distorted
5625-556: Was recommended in the Ethics of the Physician written by Ishāq ibn ʻAlī al-Ruhāwī (854–931). He stated that a visiting physician had to make duplicate notes of a patient's condition on every visit. When the patient was cured or had died, the notes of the physician were examined by a local medical council of other physicians, who would decide whether the treatment had met the required standards of medical care. Professional peer review
#738261