Pmw Literature Review - 718 Words

An increasing number of evidence supports how PMW assistance improves the quality and readability of the publication, enhances the submission process, and increases the chance of publication in a peer-reviewed journal (Bailey, 2011; Woolley, 2011; Gattrell, 2016; Shah, 2016). Despite the involvement of PMWs in the publication of clinical trials data in peer-reviewed journals has several advantages, few data show what value corresponding authors place on PMWs. My short online survey attempted to fill this gap gathering perspectives of corresponding authors both with and without PMW working experience. My survey aimed at assessing their opinions and gaining insights into their understanding of PMW assistance in several steps of the†¦show more content†¦My inability to reach the selected corresponding authors could be due to the corresponding authors no-n-adherence to the ORCID registry, for instance. Therefore, PMWs and medcomms agencies should encourage ORCID propagation among their network of authors. The response rate (RR) for my survey was 14.3% (32/223), which is lower than what previously reported in online surveys of corresponding authors. RR of Marchington (2014) and Camby (2014) studies was 29.2% (76/260) and 32.6% (415/1263), respectively. However, my survey is not entirely comparable with these two previous surveys. In Marchington’s study, 260 academic and clinical authors were surveyed, but as outlined by the authors, this population may have been biased as it included only authors who used PMWs and were linked to one particular medcomms agency. Camby and colleagues instead conducted a large online follow-up survey. A total of 1263 investigators and researchers who had previously authored at least one publication in collaboration with GSK Vaccines were invited. The main strength of my survey compared to Marchington’s study was its completely blinded and systematic method to select the corresponding authors. Because of its unbiased and unsolicited nature, it might be reasonable that my RR is nearly half of that reported in Marchington’s survey (14.3% versus 29.2%). Although my RR is not too high, it is almost in line with the RR of another survey conducted among 327Show MoreRelatedPmw Essay1246 Words   |  5 PagesPMWs often undertake professional development programmes provided by the three leading medical writers professional organisations, the American Medical Writing Association (AMWA), the European Medical Writing Association (EMWA), and the ISMPP to be regularly updated in this regard (Bissau, 2015). The ISMPP, founded in 2005 to enhance medical publication integrity and transparency and to improve standards and best practice, believes that â€Å"medical writers can often improve the efficiency and effectivenessRead MoreRandomised Controlled Trials Essay1652 Words   |  7 Pagescommunication of scientific advances to a wide range of healthcare providers. This dissemination is crucial for ensuring that clinical decisions made by healthcare professionals and patients reflect the best scientific evidence. The peer-reviewed biomedical literature is, in fact, the key source for making treatment decisions in a rational, fair and objective manner (JAMA), and scientists are not the only people who benefit from publication of clinical trial results. Also, patients and their physicians gain knowledge