42
TO THE EDITO R:
The existence o f quitefa st a nd a c c ura te me a ns o f w ritte n co mmunicatio n has definitely co ntributed to the re ma rka b le d e ve lo p me nt in M e d ic ine this century. The increased number o f scientific wo rks published as a result o f the medical investig atio n quality enhancement has trig g ered the need fo r chang es in the wo rk style itself, which sho uld be co ncisely written and well structured. The space re se rve d fo r p ub lic a tio ns in jo urna ls is to o va lua b le to b e wa ste d in re dunda nc ie s a nd fastidio usness. Likewise, the time available fo r reading is sho rt, explaining why a clear and o bjective article results in an asset to the reader. Ho wever, a medical scientific publicatio n sho uld also bring eno ug h info rmatio n fo r readers to be able to : 1 . Repeat the described pro cedures; 2 . Assess the Autho r’s o bservatio ns, and 3 . Assess the intellectual pro cesses develo ped by the autho r o f the repo rt.1 Therefo re, data sho uld be as full as po ssible and the so urces fro m which the autho r based his ideas sho uld be clearly referred to .
In the Sã o Pa ulo M e d ic a l Jo urna l’ s Instructio ns we co me acro ss a limitatio n to the number o f References fo r g iven types o f articles i.e. Brief Co mmunicatio ns, Case Repo rt and Letter to the Edito r, with a maximum o f o nly fo ur being set. O bvio usly such types o f articles require fewer
c o rro b o ra ting da ta a nd a sma ller numb er o f quo tatio ns, g iven the character o f the descriptio n itself; ho wever, no w and then the case repo rt may be mo re co mplex o r o f scientific relevance, deserving the trig g ering o f an intellectual pro cess, based o n multiple so urces and previo us case repo rts, which sho uld be quo ted and witho ut which there wo uld be the risk o f inaccuracy o r lack o f reliability.
It seems clear that there sho uld be an ideal number o f allo wed references. Their excess is currently no t desirable, as this may even acco unt fo r mo re do ubt than actual eruditio n o r co nvictio n o n the part o f the repo rter. Ho wever, o n the o ther hand the lack o r curtailment o f such referencer ma y imp a ir c o rre c t inte rp re ta tio n o r e ve n repetitio n o f the clinical experiment.
In relatio n to such remarks it seems suitable to quo te Aristo tle - “ In Medio Virtus!” - Therefo re, g o o d sense sho uld prevail. The autho r must be clear, co ncise, o bjective. The Jo urnal, thro ug h the required and attentive wo rk o f its Edito r and Reviewers, is in a po sitio n to co ntro l and g uide the Autho r who has fo rwarded his/ her paper, heeding the Instruc tio ns req uirements. And a useful exchang e o f info rmatio n results fro m this recipro cal co ntact, allo wing fo r the enhancement o f the finished pro duct - The Published Paper.
Medical Journal
S ã o Pa u l oLetter to the E ditor
REVISTA PA ULISTA DE M EDIC IN A
Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med 1999; 117(1):42-3.
S ho uld the re b e a re c o mme nd e d limit to the numb e r
43
Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med 1999; 117(1):42-3.
This dialo g ue is imperative and o f ultimate relevance fo r the impro vement o f articles and as a result, fo r the Jo urnal to be fully successful.
Thus, b y pro po sing suc h a de b a te , we sug g est that the number o f references allo wed fo r the a b o ve mentio ned types b e no lo ng er limited, b ut ra ther tha t the reviewer’s c riteria sho uld p re va il, ta king into a c c o unt the impo rtance o r relevance o f the matter described. Such is o ur pro po sitio n.
Ja im e Anger
REFERENCE
1. Day RA. - Có mo escribir y publicar trabajo s científico s. The Oryx Press, Washingto n, 1990.
I N RESPO N SE:
Re sp o nd ing to the questio n “ sho uld there be a reco mmended limit to the numb e r o f re fe re nc e s in a sc ie ntific article? ” : witho ut do ubt, the answer is yes! In the autho rs’ discussio n, they have already fo und the answer: g o o d sense is the final wo rd. And the Jo urnal has been acting within this spirit, reco mmending the g eneral lines o f ho w articles sho uld a ppe a r, a nd whe n ne c e ssa ry, g iving individual evaluatio n to the article in questio n.The reco mmendatio ns o f the Jo urnal are no t limited to the number o f citatio ns, but also refer to the number o f pag es, fig ures and o ther items o f the structure and co ntents o f the article. By do ing this, we a re impro ving the q ua lity (fo rm a nd
co ntent) o f the Jo urnal still further. These rules fo llo w the re c o mme nd a tio ns o f the Inte rna tio na l Co mmittee o f Medical Jo urnal Edito rs1 and also the reco mmendatio ns fo r the statistical co ntent,2 which autho rs sho uld be familiar with befo re starting to co mpo se their manuscripts.
To co nclude by citing Day3 reg arding the characteristics o f a study, in recent times such characteristics have been evo lving into ano ther three: validity, impo rtance and applicability,4 to permit the reader to evaluate an article.
It is a lwa ys o ppo rtune fo r a utho rs a nd readers o f the Jo urnal to discuss aspects o f the no rms a d o p te d b y the Jo urna l, a nd suc h feedback is always beneficial.
Aldem a r Ara ujo Ca stro, M D, M Chir Deputy Edito r
REFERENCES
1. Internatio nal Co mmittee o f Medical Jo urnal Edito rs. Unifo rm require-ments fo r manuscripts submitted to bio medical jo urnals. Ann In-tern Med 1997;126(1):36-47.
2. Altman DG; Go re SM; Gardner MJ; Po co ck SJ. Statistical guidelines fo r c o ntrib uto rs to m e d ic al jo urnals. Br Me d J (Clin Re s Ed ) 1983;286(6376):1489-93.
3. Day R. Ho w to write and publish a scientific paper. 4th editio n. Pho e-nix: Oryx Press; 1994.
4. Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical literature. I. Ho w to get started. The Evidence-Based Medicine Wo rk-ing Gro up. JAMA 1993;270(17):2093-5.
