Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closelaboratory animals & co-publication
Posted by pdunn on 07 Jul 2010 at 13:26 GMT
The title should have included "laboratory" before animals.
I am also wondering why this paper was published simultaneously in several journals (see refs 55-60). This would not be acceptable in my fields of ecology and animal behavior.
If an article provides a professional service, such as this, then it is usually published in society newsletters to "spread the word", not published several times in multiple journals.
RE: laboratory animals & co-publication
KChapman replied to pdunn on 12 Jul 2010 at 14:20 GMT
I think this post is in reference to another, related paper in PLoS biology entitled "Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research".
It is standard practice to publish guidelines such as ARRIVE in peer reviewed journals. Experience with other guidelines, for example CONSORT, indicates that the most effective way of ensuring uptake is through multiple publications. This is particularly important when as with ARRIVE the guidelines are intended for scientists from a diverse range of disciplines.
Publication in a newsletter rather than a peer reviewed journal would not give the guidelines the same level of credibility or robustness that is required.