Radboud Annals of Medical Students

RAMS

  • Home
  • News
    • Newsletter archive
  • About
    • RAMS
    • The Board
      • The General Board
        • The General Board (2021-2022)
        • Previous General Boards
      • The Editorial Board
        • The Editorial Board (2021-2022)
        • Previous Editorial Boards
    • The Supervisory Board
    • Reviewers and Editors
    • RAMS Committees
      • Symposium Committee
      • Masterclass Committee
  • Editions
    • 2021-2022
      • Twentieth Edition – September 2021
      • Twentyfirst Edition – December 2021
      • Twenty second Edition – March 2022
    • 2020-2021
      • Sixteenth edition – September 2020
      • Seventeenth edition – December 2020
      • Eighteenth edition – March 2021
      • Nineteenth Edition – June 2021
    • 2019-2020
      • Fourteenth edition – December 2019
      • Fifteenth edition – April 2020
      • Sixteenth edition – September 2020
    • 2018-2019
      • Eleventh Edition – September 2018
      • Twelfth Edition – January 2019
      • Thirteenth edition – May 2019
    • 2017 – 2018
      • Ninth Edition – November 2017
      • Tenth Edition – February 2018
    • 2016-2017
      • Sixth Edition – November 2016
      • Seventh Edition – March 2017
      • Eighth Edition – July 2017
    • 2015-2016
      • Third Edition – November 2015
      • Fourth Edition – March 2016
      • Fifth Edition – June 2016
    • 2014-2015
      • Pilot Edition – June 2014
      • First Edition – January 2015
      • Second Edition – June 2015
  • For Authors
    • Submit your Article
    • Research internship
  • For Supervisors
  • For Reviewers
  • Contact
  • Privacy policy
Je bent hier: Home / Articles / Back to Basic

Back to Basic

5 februari 2017 by Rams

By Sebastian Arts

We, as scientists, publish a lot of papers these days. It looks like publishing is the primary aim of our research. But what is doing research really about? Is it about publishing articles in order to get a job or promotion? Or is it more old fashioned, like searching for the truth out of curiosity? And what do we want to achieve? Do we want to do research because it increases our job opportunities? Do we do it for international fame? Or do we really just simply want to improve our field of interest through our findings? 

These questions should be rhetoric, but they are not. We live in a scientific society in which publication pressure is so high and has such an impact on our career that we have no choice but to publish. We are suffering from publication mania. I don’t want to generalise,  but this is the tendency of the scientific field these days. 

This overproduction of manuscripts is bringing a lot of work to reviewers and editors, the gatekeepers of our journals. Since everyone is trying to get published in a journal with a high impact factor, this problem is mostly visible in these journals. By the way, a high impact factor is interpreted as high quality, but objectively it is defined as a measure to reflect on the yearly number of citations of articles that were published in that journal. In principle, those two are slightly different. Nevertheless, this overload of manuscripts causes high pressure in reviewers and editors which threatens the quality of their, and our, work. This can result in significant mistakes. Besides, shortcomings in statistical analyses are hard to find for non-statisticians and are mostly not the reviewer’s favorite part of the reviewing process.

In December of 2016 the article of Dong et al. was published in Nature. This article caused a lot of commotion within the scientific society, since the manuscript had methodological flaws and the data analysis seemed poorly performed. These shortcomings were not noticed by the editorial staff. Reviewers didn’t look closely enough at the data-analysis and were very sparing in their comments.

So, there are two problems. The first is that we suffer from publication mania. The second is that peer review does not seem to work as well as we had thought. Nevertheless, I think that we need to start at the beginning. Let’s go back to basic! Do science out of curiosity and it will be fun! And when something is fun you will be more dedicated. Dedication will lead to high quality production without major flaws that need to be taken out by reviewers and statisticians. However, the review process needs to stay intact. Finally, this workflow will result in a nice scientific career. I think that this needs to be the train of thought and not the other way around.

1. Dong X, Milholland B, Vijg J. Evidence for a limit to human lifespan. Nature. 2016 Oct 13;538(7624):257-9.

Categorie: Articles, News

RAMS Newsletter

RAMS complies to the GDPR. By submitting your e-mail address to us you agree with our Privacy Policy.

Social Media


Sponsors & Partners

  • Brian Gardner
  • Lauren Mancke
  • Nathan Rice
  • Nick Croft
  • Rafal Tomal
  • Ron Rennick
© Copyright 2014 RADBOUD ANNALS OF MEDICAL STUDENTS · All Rights Reserved · Powered by PLatform11
Beheer cookie toestemming

Om de beste ervaringen te bieden, gebruiken wij technologieën zoals cookies om informatie over je apparaat op te slaan en/of te raadplegen. Door in te stemmen met deze technologieën kunnen wij gegevens zoals surfgedrag of unieke ID's op deze site verwerken. Als je geen toestemming geeft of uw toestemming intrekt, kan dit een nadelige invloed hebben op bepaalde functies en mogelijkheden.

Functioneel Altijd actief
De technische opslag of toegang is strikt noodzakelijk voor het legitieme doel het gebruik mogelijk te maken van een specifieke dienst waarom de abonnee of gebruiker uitdrukkelijk heeft gevraagd, of met als enig doel de uitvoering van de transmissie van een communicatie over een elektronisch communicatienetwerk.
Voorkeuren
De technische opslag of toegang is noodzakelijk voor het legitieme doel voorkeuren op te slaan die niet door de abonnee of gebruiker zijn aangevraagd.
Statistieken
De technische opslag of toegang die uitsluitend voor statistische doeleinden wordt gebruikt. De technische opslag of toegang die uitsluitend wordt gebruikt voor anonieme statistische doeleinden. Zonder dagvaarding, vrijwillige naleving door uw Internet Service Provider, of aanvullende gegevens van een derde partij, kan informatie die alleen voor dit doel wordt opgeslagen of opgehaald gewoonlijk niet worden gebruikt om je te identificeren.
Marketing
De technische opslag of toegang is nodig om gebruikersprofielen op te stellen voor het verzenden van reclame, of om de gebruiker op een website of over verschillende websites te volgen voor soortgelijke marketingdoeleinden.
Beheer opties Beheer diensten Beheer leveranciers Lees meer over deze doeleinden
Bekijk voorkeuren
{title} {title} {title}