Adequacy of authors' replies to criticism raised in electronic letters to the editor: cohort study
Adequacy of authors' replies to criticism raised in electronic letters to the editor: cohort study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/bmj.c3926
复制
发表时间：
2010-08-10
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lundh, Andreas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gotzsche, Peter C.;Delamothe, Tony;Lundh, Andreas
[目的]探讨电子信函中的实质性批评是否得到了作者的充分重视。设计队列研究。设置在2005年10月至2007年9月期间。纳入bmj.com快速反应部分产生实质性批评的研究论文的标准。主要结果衡量由两位编辑判断的批评的严重程度(轻微、中等或重大)以及作者(完全、部分或不)对批评的处理程度。结果350篇中有105篇(30%)提出了实质性批评，95%可信区间25%至35%)包括研究论文，其中作者回复了47篇(45%，35%至54%)。在这些论文中，批评的严重程度与58篇没有作者回复的论文相同(两组平均得分2.2，P=0.72)。对于47篇带有回复的批评，无论是编辑(P=0.88，P=0.95)还是批评者(P=0.83，应答率85%)，批评的严重程度与回复的充分性之间没有关系。然而，批评者对这些回复的批评要比编辑多得多(平均得分2.3vs1.4，P
Objective To investigate whether substantive criticism in electronic letters to the editor, defined as a problem that could invalidate the research or reduce its reliability, is adequately addressed by the authors.Design Cohort study.SettingBMJ between October 2005 and September 2007.Inclusion criteria Research papers generating substantive criticism in the rapid responses section on bmj.com.Main outcome measures Severity of criticism (minor, moderate, or major) as judged by two editors and extent to which the criticism was addressed by authors (fully, partly, or not) as judged by two editors and the critics.Results A substantive criticism was raised against 105 of 350 (30%, 95% confidence interval 25% to 35%) included research papers, and of these the authors had responded to 47 (45%, 35% to 54%). The severity of the criticism was the same in those papers as in the 58 without author replies (mean score 2.2 in both groups, P=0.72). For the 47 criticisms with replies, there was no relation between the severity of the criticism and the adequacy of the reply, neither as judged by the editors (P=0.88 and P=0.95, respectively) nor by the critics (P=0.83; response rate 85%). However, the critics were much more critical of the replies than the editors (average score 2.3 v 1.4, P