Use of ICMJE URM for ethical guidance – Pubrica

Copyright © 2021 pubrica. All rights reserved 1

Use of ICMJE URM for Ethical Guidance

Dr. Nancy Agnes, Head,

Technical Operations, Pubrica

[email protected]

In-Brief

The guidelines were established by the

International Committee of Medical

Journal Editors (ICMJE). To investigate

best practises and ethical principles in the

conduct and reporting of research and

other content presented in medical journals

and assist publishers, editors, and those

interested in peer review and biomedical

publication in developing and

disseminating reliable, transparent,

reproducible, and impartial medical

journal articles.

I. INTRODUCTION

These guidelines are specifically for writers

who consider sending their work to one of

the ICMJE's members papers. Many non-

ICMJE publications use these guidelines on

their initiative. The ICMJE publication

supports this practice, but it lacks the power

to oversee or execute it. In both cases,

authors may combine these guidelines with

the guidance for authors provided by

specific journals. The ICMJE supports the

widespread distribution of these guidelines

and full reuse of this document for

educational and non-profit purposes without

respect for copyright. However, all the

recommendations and document can guide

readers to www.icmje.org for the official,

most recent edition. The ICMJE updates the

recommendations regularly as new problems

emerge.

This paper, formerly known as the Uniform

Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to

Biomedical Journals, has been published in

several editions by the ICMJE (URMs). The

URM was created in 1978 to standardize

manuscript publication support formatting

and planning through journals.

"Recommendations for Scholarly Work in

Medical Journals: Conduct, Reporting,

Editing, and Publication"

II. USE OF ICMJE URM FOR ETHICAL

GUIDANCE

A. Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors

Authorship bears a lot of weight in the

intellectual, social, and financial realms.

Authorship also requires liability and

transparency for work that has been written.

The following suggestions are meant to

ensure that contributors who have made

significant intellectual contributions to a

paper are given authorship credit. The

contributors who are credited as authors are

aware of their responsibilities and

accountability for what is written. Since

authorship does not specify what

contributions qualify a person to be an

author, some publications are now

requesting and publishing information about

each person's contributions identified as a

participant in a submitted report, at least for

original research.

B. Financial and non-financial partnerships and practices, as well as

possible conflicts of interest.

The transparency in which an author's

interactions and activities, specifically or

topically relevant to work, are treated during

https://pubrica.com/services/publication-support/?utm_source=Organic&utm_medium=Gpp3&utm_campaign=Gpp3


the preparation, execution, publishing, peer

review, editing, and publishing of scientific

work affects a public interest in the

scientific process quality of published

medical publication support. A clinical

opinion on a primary objective (such as

patients' health or the validity of research) is

affected by a secondary interest. There is a

risk of conflict of interest and prejudice

(such as financial gain). Conflicts of interest

beliefs are almost as important as actual

conflicts of interest.

Financial links (such as jobs, consultancies,

equity ownership or options, honoraria,

trademarks, and paid expert testimony) are

the easiest to spot, the ones that are more

commonly viewed as possible conflicts of

interest.

Those other interests, such as personal

relationships or rivalries, academic rivalry,

and intellectual values, can also reflect or be

viewed as disputes.

C. Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process

An increasing number of organizations

claim to be "scholarly medical journals" but

do not operate as such. These journals (also

known as "predatory" or "pseudo-journals")

accept and print almost all submissions and

charge article processing (or "publication")

fees, which are only disclosed to authors

after a paper is accepted for publication.

They sometimes tend to do peer review but

do not, and they can have titles that are

confusingly similar to well-known journals.

D. Journal Owners and Editorial Freedom

The appointment and firing of editors is the

responsibility of medical journal members.

Owners should provide editors with a

contract that explicitly outlines their rights

and liabilities, jurisdiction, the basic terms

of their appointment, and dispute resolution

mechanisms at the time of their

appointment. The editor's output can

generally be measured using agreed-upon

measures such as readership, manuscript

submissions and handling times, and

different journal metrics, among others.

E. Protection of Research Participants

https://pubrica.com/services/publication-support/?utm_source=Organic&utm_medium=Gpp3&utm_campaign=Gpp3https://pubrica.com/academy/journal-selection/publishing-in-a-reputed-medical-journal/https://pubrica.com/academy/journal-selection/publishing-in-a-reputed-medical-journal/


Both inspectors can ensure that human

research is prepared, performed, and

documented in compliance with the Helsinki

Declaration, as amended in 2013. All

authors should request approval from an

independent local, state, or national review

body (e.g., ethics committee, institutional

review board). The analysis was done in

compliance with the Helsinki Declaration,

the authors must clarify their reasoning and

show that the study's questionable aspects

were accepted explicitly by a local, state, or

national review authority.

The provision for informed consent should

be included in the journal's author

guidelines. It should be stated in the written

article where informed consent has been

received.

III. CONCLUSION

The ICMJE Recommendations have a

limited ability to avoid market prejudice.

Still, they provide helpful safeguards against

the most severe possible commercial

violations of literature, such as poor

statistical requirements, guest authorship,

and nondisclosure of industry participation.

The Recommendations have since been used

to develop research practices, such as study

registration and evolving guidance on data

sharing. The ICMJE must bear a particular

responsibility for weaknesses in the content

of medical literature, to the degree that these

flaws are ignored or even promoted by the

ICMJE's criteria. By urging their continued

evolution and asserting the validity of these

flawed but necessary guidelines, beneficial

effects on science and publishing standards,

including in commercial literature. Avail

Publication support services from Pubrica.

REFERENCES

1. Fugh-Berman, AJ. The haunting of medical journals:

how ghostwriting sold "HRT". PLoS Med.

2010;7:e1000335.

2. Matheson A. Corporate science and the husbandry of

scientific and medical knowledge by the pharmaceutical

industry. BioSocieties. 2008;3:355–82.

3. Sismondo S. Ghost management: how much of the

medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the

pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med. 2007;4:e286.

4. Fugh-Berman A, McDonald CP, Bell AM, Bethards EC,

Scialli AR. Promotional tone in reviews of menopausal

hormone therapy after the Women's Health Initiative: an

analysis of published articles. PLoS Med.

2011;8:e1000425.
https://pubrica.com/services/publication-support/?utm_source=Organic&utm_medium=Gpp3&utm_campaign=Gpp3

Use of ICMJE URM for ethical guidance – Pubrica

Services

Transcript of Use of ICMJE URM for ethical guidance – Pubrica