Sunday, 1 May, 2011
Keynote Address
John Whyte, MD, MPH
Discovery Channel
John Whyte, MD, MPH, Chief Medical Expert and Vice President, Discovery Channel
John J. Whyte, MD, MPH is currently the Chief Medical Expert and Vice President, and Patient Education at Discovery Channel, part of the media conglomerate Discovery Communications. In this role, Dr. Whyte develops, designs and delivers educational programming that appeals to both a medical and lay audience. This includes television shows, online content, and DVDs.
Prior to Discovery, Dr. Whyte was in the Immediate Office of the Director at the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality. He served as Medical Advisor/Director of the Council on Private Sector Initiatives to Improve the Safety, Security, and Quality of Healthcare. Prior to this assignment, Dr. Whyte was the Acting Director, Division of Medical Items and Devices in the Coverage and Analysis Group in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). In his role at CMS, Dr. Whyte made recommendations as to whether or not the Medicare program should pay for certain procedures, equipment, or services. As Division Director as well as Medical Officer/Senior Advisor, Dr. Whyte was responsible for more national coverage decisions than any other CMS staff.
Dr. Whyte is a board-certified internist. He completed an internal medicine residency at Duke University Medical Center as well as earned a Masters of Public Health (MPH) in Health Policy and Management at Harvard University School of Public Health. Prior to arriving in Washington, Dr. Whyte was a health services research fellow at Stanford and attending physician in the Department of Medicine. He has written extensively in the medical and lay press on health policy issues.
01 – Ethics Clinic: The What, When, and Where of Data Sharing
Transparency in research on all levels has forced editors, editorial offices, authors, and reviewers to review their practices. This clinic will focus on the issue of depositing and sharing data related to a manuscript and exploring the options of what to deposit, where to deposit it, and when to deposit it. Attendees will have the opportunity to interact with peers and discuss cases related to depositing and sharing data while understanding the concerns of authors and editors in the biomedical, life, and physical sciences.
Learning Objectives:
- Recognize rationale and requirements regarding data sharing/deposition.
- Understand the role of authors regarding data sharing.
- Understand the role of editors regarding data sharing.
- Formulate effective instructions for data deposition and sharing.
Moderators:
Jennifer Mahar
Managing Editor, Evolution and Conservation Letters, Wiley-Blackwell
Anna G. Trudgett, MA, ELS
Assistant Director – Editorial; Managing Editor, Blood, American Society of Hematology
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
02 – Now What? The State of the STM Marketplace in 2011 … and Beyond
- Robert Schwarzwalder, Director, Library Technologies Division, Stanford University, David Bousfield, Outsell, Richard Newman, AMA
The last few years haven’t been kind to STM publishers, who have been dancing as fast as they can to adapt to economic pressures, a fast-evolving technological landscape and dramatic changes in the way scholars seek, access and use information. Are things calming down, or is the turmoil likely to continue, even if in different ways? Are there opportunities hidden among the challenges? WhatÕs a nervous publisher (and editor) to do? We’ll get the big picture – the negative and the positive – from a panel of industry leaders and analysts.
Learning Objectives:
- Review current economic, technical and cultural trends and challenges in the STM marketplace.
- Discuss new product strategies being pursued by major STM publishers.
- Outline how changes in user information needs and behavior affect the STM marketplace.
- Review how market challenges and opportunities are affecting society publishers particularly.
Moderator:
Bill Silberg
Principal, Silberg Consulting; AIP
Who Should Attend:
- The target audience for this session is publishers, editors in chief, managing editors, production editors and any other editorial or publishing staff with an interest in the economic, social and other forces affecting the professional publishing marketplace.
03 – Word Tips for Editors
- Jonina Dames, Customer Support Specialist, Inera Inc.
- Elizabeth Blake, Director of Product and Business Development, Inera Inc.
In this session, participants will learn tips to work more efficiently by using the advanced (and often hidden) features of Word, with a focus on Word as an editing rather than an authoring tool. The curriculum includes personalizing Word, formatting options, document navigation, shortcuts, and more.
The session will also address variations in these tools for different versions of Word (e.g., 2003, 2007, and 2010). Regardless of the version they work with, participants will learn how to make the most out of Word as an editorial tool.
Learning Objectives:
- Learn to use Word more efficiently by using advanced features.
- Learn to personalize Word, format options, navigate documents, create shortcuts.
- Make the most out of Word 2003, 2007, or 2010 as an editorial tool.
Moderator:
Patricia Baskin
Executive Editor, Neurology
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Writer/Editor
04 – Seeking and Using Reader Feedback to Improve Your Journal
- Arlene Weissman, PhD, Director, Research Center, American College of Physicians
The presenter will provide editors-in-chief, managing editors, editorial board members and senior editorial staff with an overview of different approaches and venues and tools for obtaining reader feedback, along with recommendations for how feedback can be used to enhance reader engagement, content relevance and optimization of delivery.
The session also will offer recommendations for ongoing reader assessment through feedback collection features on journal sites, and for periodic special reader survey for general evaluation or for exploration of a specific area of interest.
Learning Objectives:
- Differentiate between different models and formats for obtaining reader feedback for an academic journal, suitable for different contexts and aims.
- Be familiar with technology such as web based surveys, feedback boxes, focus groups and other forms of data collection, and know the resources needed for each approach.
- Recognize approaches for aggregating and interpreting the data collection and how to make improvement recommendations based on the findings.
- Understand when and in what ways reader feedback may assist in improving the utility and value of your publication.
Moderator:
Ingrid Philibert
PhD, MBA, Managing Editor, Journal of Graduate Medical Education, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
05 – Local Language Editions, Global Society Outreach & International Partners
- Steven Sayre, Director of Marketing and Publishing, International Anesthesia Research Society
- Adrian Stanley, CEO, Charlesworth Group (USA) Inc.
This session will look in to the pros and cons of setting up and managing a local language translated foreign edition of your publication, it will take you through the step by step ways local language editions are developed and managed, and take a global look at which countries and languages are most prevalent. The session will also look at the benefits of more local outreach that publishers and societies are carrying out. International markets are seen now as both sources for new sales and business opportunities and also valuable sources of key research and author content that an international journal cannot afford to ignore.
Learning Objectives:
- Understanding of how local language editions are set up and managed.
- A better under about the benefits and risks of how to set up a local language edition.
- Greater awareness geographically of where local language editions work, and where to put ones efforts.
- A greater understanding of international outreach opportunities, and ways to collaborate more deeply in foreign markets, as well as knowing and understanding the work and effort involved to do this, and the risks if nothing is done.
Moderator:
Adrian Stanley
CEO, Charlesworth Group (USA) Inc.
Who Should Attend:
- Publishers, managing editors and production editors who have an interest in the international development and outreach of their publication.
06 – Alternatives to Impact Factor
- Marie McVeigh, ISI Thomsonm
- Niels Weertman, Scopus
Impact Factors have become a universal epidemia for simplified post-publication evaluation of science. It reflects Journal quality but is nowhere near reflecting quality of researchers, or their scientific production. Proposed alternatives (e.g., Eigen Factor, Scimago Journal Ranking refine evaluation of journals, not of published science. H Index was hailed as a panacea, but shortcomings evil side effects etc are everyday more evident. Journal evaluation is improving individual scientific production is being misjudged. Where do we go from here?
Learning Objectives:
- Shortcomings of Impact Factors as a measure of journal quality.
- Alternatives.
- Shortcomings of Impact Factors as a measure of published science quality.
- Alternatives.
Moderator:
Dr. Mauricio Rocha-e-Silva
CEO, Clinics, Hospital das Cl’nicas, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Who Should Attend:
- Editors
- Publishers
- Scientometricians
- Evaluators of scientific output
07 – Media Outreach: Tips for Getting Attention in a Wired World
- Ivan Oransky, Executive Editor, Reuters Health
- Jann Ingmire, Director, Media Relations, JAMA and Archives Journals
The media landscape is changing at breakneck speed. Traditional news outlets, long the main targets of scholarly publishers’ outreach efforts, are dancing as fast as they can to remain relevant and competitive. Meanwhile, “new media” channels – from blogs to Twitter to Facebook to YouTube and beyond – are popping up like weeds. With so much competition, ever-tightening budgets and new rules of engagement how can professional editors and publishers get the most bang for the buck when it comes to media relations? Leading experts in this field will review what editors and publishers should know about the new face of the media, what reporters look for today, how to most effectively use social media, and best practices for how to be your own news outlet without going crazy.
Learning Objectives:
- Outline recent changes in the media landscape and their implications for media relations in professional publishing.
- Discuss basic media relations strategy and techniques and how these should be adapted for optimal impact in todayÕs promotion/outreach environment.
- Review best practices for use of social media to gain audience attention and enhance visibility.
- Detail three specific ideas that any publisher/editor can use to cost-effectively improve current media relations efforts.
Moderator:
Bill Silberg
Principal, Silberg Consulting
Who Should Attend:
- Anyone who might come into contact with the news media and/or has a role in helping journals and other professional publications seek media attention, including editors in chief, managing editors, publishers and writers/editors.
08 – Launching into a Freelance Career
- Suzanne Meyers, Independent Editing Professional
- Caroline Define, Freelance Editor, Proofreader, and Project Manager
Being flexible and open in your career options is an important component of individual career development. This might be even more relevant in the current economic conditions. The session will focus on introducing a free lance career options and present strategies on how to launch and manage a successful free lance career in scientific journal publishing. It will provide you with tools, resources and advice on exploring opportunities outside a full-time employment.
Learning Objectives:
- Introduction to freelance career management.
- Advice on making a career change choice.
- Establishing contacts and marketing yourself.
- Managing being your own boss as well as managing client relationships.
Moderator:
Mary Boylan
Managing Editor, American College of Physicians
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Writer/Editor
09 – The Road Less Traveled: Why Contributorship is Worth the Walk
- Mary Scheetz, PhD, Research Integrity Consulting, LLC
The purpose of this session is to examine how CSE member journals address authorship in their instructions to authors (IA), with a specific examination of contributorship. This session will summarize the findings of 500+ CSE member journals instructions to authors IA. A content analysis was designed, coded and analyzed by three reviewers (MS, KO, and DSL). The examination of IA provides insight into what is expected from authors and the accountability of their roles for manuscript submission. While many journals provide extensive IA, the treatment of contributorship is minimal. Journals should consider implementing the contributorship model due to its transparent nature and thereby removing any confusion of an authorÕs role for the reported research.
Learning Objectives:
- Journals should have clear Instructions to Authors as a way to promote integrity of their publication.
- Authorship criteria are more prevalent than contributorship criteria in the journals of CSE constituents.
- There is minimal uniformity in the instructions to authors among journals regarding authorship or contributorship.
- Publishing professionals should consider implementing the contributorship model as a way to strengthen authorship accountability.
Panel for Discussion:
- Ana Marusic, Co-Editor in Chief, Croatian Medical Journal
- Jill Filler, Managing Editor, American Society for Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics
- John Long, Managing Editor, The Plant Cell
Who Should Attend:
- Publication professionals interested in journal instructional policies.
10 – Juggling Journals: Order Out of Chaos?
- Rich Dodenhoff, Journals Director, American Society for Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics
- Kenneth F. Heideman, Director of Publications, American Meteorological Society
Does your job require you to work with more than one editor and editorial board? More than one staff or job site? Different production schedules? Are you constantly struggling to keep all of these balls in the air? This session brings together two experts with experience in juggling these demands – one speaking from the perspective of a managing editor and the other from the perspective of a publication director – with the goal of presenting challenges and strategies for making the job easier and more productive for those who manage more than one title.
Learning Objectives:
- Time management for simultaneously overseeing different journals.
- Communicating with different staffs, editors, editorial boards.
- Effective scheduling.
- How to keep from being overworked.
Moderator:
Denis G. Baskin, PhD, Professor of Medicine; Executive Editor, Journal of Histochemistry and Cytochemistry, University of Washington and Seattle VA Medical Center
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
11 – Disseminating Science to the Public: Do’s and Don’ts
- Joseph M. Moran, Associate Director, Education Program, American Meteorological Society (AMS)
- Pierrette Tremblay, Managing Editor, Elements
Where do you start once you have decided to invest some of your society’s hard-earned money to educate the larger public about your science? How do you determine the best way to reach your audience? Two case studies will illustrate broad principles for success, such as keep a focus, know your audience, and match content and container.
Learning Objectives:
- Identify the key components of outreach projects, from planning to securing funding and evaluation.
- Outline the importance of working with scientists to get the science right.
- Explore ways to develop the language so that the message is understood by the targeted audience.
- Discuss different media (print, Internet) and pros and cons.
- Recognize the importance of evaluation.
Moderator:
Pierrette Tremblay
Managing editor, Elements magazine
Who Should Attend:
-
Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
12 – Image Integrity
- Kirsten Miles, Consultant, PI Outcomes
- John W. Krueger, PhD, Scientist-Investigator, Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
- Veronique Kiermer, Executive Editor, Nature and the Nature journals
The moderator and 2 or 3 panelists will present different perspectives on current and suggested strategies for assuring the integrity of digital images in scientific publishing, with the goal of illustrating the breadth of concerns and spectrum of responses among journals, professional societies, research funders, government agencies, and academic institutions.
Learning Objectives:
- To understand better the core issues of integrity of digital imagse in science publishing.
- To identify the reasons why leading biomedical journals are taking different approaches to assuring the quality (accuracy, validity) of digital images submitted.
- To be familiar with the Office of Research Integrity’s tools and educational activities on issues of image integrity to recognize the role of the National Science FoundationÕs requirements for a data management plan and potential impact on issues of image integrity.
- To recognize the spectrum of responses to these issues by journals in the biomedical and physical sciences.
Moderator:
Addeane S. Caelleigh
Accreditation & Faculty Development, University of Virginia School of Medicine
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
Monday, 2 May, 2011
Plenary Address:
Darlene Cavalier
The Science Cheerleader
While scientists, educators, and policymakers wring their hands over the perceived lack of public interest in and understanding of science, millions of “average” citizens are actively involved in formal research efforts, and, in the process, these so-called citizen scientists are: contributing to real science; enabling professional researchers to significantly increase data collection and sorting; creating a shared space for scientists and citizens to collaborate and build trust; and forcing the science community to rethink what it means to communicate with this new generation of DIYers. What is citizen science? How is it shaping science and what does the future hold? How are scientists and policymakers adapting? Cavalier will explore all of this and more, including a brief (entertaining) overview of some unorthodox methods she uses to attract more “average” citizens to science.
Darlene Cavalier is the founder of Science Cheerleader.com, a blog that promotes the involvement of citizens in science and science-related policy. She is also the cofounder of ScienceForCitizens.net, a major multi-functional Web site, named one of Philadelphia’s Top Ten Tech Start Ups with a Social Good*, that encourages and enables lay people to learn about, participate in, and contribute to science through recreational activities as well as formal research. Cavalier held executive positions at Walt Disney Publishing and worked at Discover Magazine for more than a decade. She was the principal investigator of a $1.5 million National Science Foundation (NSF) grant applied to promote basic research through partnerships with Disney and ABC TV and more recently collaborated with the NSF, NBC Sports and the NFL to produce the Science of NFL Football series. Cavalier is a former Philadelphia 76ers cheerleader and holds a Masters degree from the University of Pennsylvania, where she studied the role of the citizen in science. She is a writer and senior advisor to Discover Magazine, serves on the Steering Committee for Science Debate and organized an effort to launch the first-of-its-kind network to support citizen engagement in technology assessments. In addition to Science Cheerleader, founding partners of that effort include the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, Boston Museum of Science, and Arizona State University. Her dedication, impact, and innovative approaches have been featured in Science, The Scientist, the Chronicle of Higher Education, Newsweek.com, Discover Magazine, Fox National Headline News, CNN, NPR and even ESPN, and many other national media outlets in the U.S. and internationally. She and her husband live in Philadelphia with their four young children.
13 – What can Editors do to Deter and Detect Scientific Misconduct?
- Liz Wager, Publications Consultant, Sideview; Chairperson, COPE
- Monica Bradford, Executive Editor, Science
- Christine Laine, MD, MPH, Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine, American College of Physicians
- Diane Scott-Lichter, Publisher, American Association for Cancer Research
- Ivan Oransky, MD, Executive Editor, Reuters Health; blogger, Retraction Watch
Despite increasing awareness and efforts to prevent misconduct in scientific publication, it still occurs and journal editors and publishers must remain vigilant to identify suspected misconduct early and avoid publishing manuscripts that later may be called into question.
In the first annual CSE/COPE joint session, experts involved in various aspects of publishing (journal editors, a publisher, a member of the COPE Council, and a blogger from Retraction Watch) will discuss methods to prevent and identify scientific misconduct.
Learning Objectives:
- To discuss the various tools that are available to detect scientific misconduct.
- To use practical examples to show how cases of misconduct were identified or prevented.
- To provide a forum whereby scientific misconduct can be discussed by panelists with varied roles in the publication process.
- To discuss the roles of editors, publishers, authors, and readers in the prevention and identification of scientific misconduct.
Moderator:
Kristi Overgaard
Editorial and Production Manager, American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine
Who Should Attend:
- Journal editors, publishers, manuscript editors, anyone interested in learning more about how journals and publishers are handling scientific misconduct.
14 – Going Mobile: A Guide to Developing Great Apps for Scholarly Publishing
- Michael Clarke, EVP, Product and Market Development, Silver Chair
- Adam Carey, VP & Client Service Director, AcrossAir
- David Martinsen, Senior Scientist, ACS
- Darrell Gunter, Chief Commercial Officer, AIP
Developing applications for smartphones, tablets and other handheld devices is all the rage. The iPhone store alone offers hundreds of thousands of the things, with the Android and Blackberry markets catching up quickly. Many, of course, are little more than entertaining or just plain silly. But the level of sophistication and value apps can offer professional audiences, including those of us in scholarly publishing, is growing impressively. The challenge, of course, is to know what professional audiences really want in apps and how to give it to them without losing your shirt. WeÕll explore those key issues, and more, with an expert panel of representatives from a scholarly society, a professional publisher and a leading technology developer.
Learning Objectives:
- Review current market data on the development and use of apps in scholarly publishing.
- Discuss the process by which editors, publishers and others might determine how to launch and maintain an apps development program.
- Outline the opportunities and risks inherent in different development models.
- Demonstrate a range of apps that might serve as models for societies considering entering this market.
Moderators:
Bill Silberg
Principal, Silberg Consulting
Robert Harington
Publisher, AIP Partnerships
Who Should Attend:
- The target audience for this session is publishers, editors in chief, managing editors, production editors and any other editorial or publishing staff with an interest in the development and use of applications in scholarly communication.
15 – Current Activities of EQUATOR Network
- Ana Marusic, Professor, Editor in Chief, Croatian Medical Journal
The session will present the current activities of the EQUATOR Network and look into possibilities for developing publishing guidelines for research outside of the biomedical field.
Learning Objectives:
- Learning about publishing guidelines for different types of research.
- Implementing publishing guidelines in editorial work.
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
Awards Luncheon
Please join us for lunch as CSE acknowledges and celebrates the hard work and accomplishments of members and colleagues. The International Scholarship winners will also be highlighted in a special presentation.
16 – Update on the Authors Submission Toolkit
- Ann Murphy, Managing Editor, The Oncologist
- Robert Enck, MD, Editor-in-Chief, American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine
A need for increased transparency in industry-sponsored research and resulting rise in submission volumes challenges authors’ and journals’ abilities to efficiently disseminate results to the public, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry. In 2010, a team of editors, publishers and pharmaceutical publishing professionals co-authored an “Authors’ Submission Toolkit”, a compilation of best practices aimed at promoting transparent, high-quality dissemination of results. The Toolkit was developed by the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices (MPIP) initiative, collaboration between industry representatives and International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP). Since the ToolkitÕs publication, MPIP has worked with journals, companies and other groups to actively disseminate it to authors. In this session, Toolkit co-authors will discuss its rationale, key components, and impact on improving quality and transparency in industry-sponsored research.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand the key components of the MPIP “Authors’ Submission Toolkit,” the rationale for their inclusion and their intended impact on improving publication quality and transparency.
- Gain insights into the “real world” applicability of the Toolkit through research findings and examples.
- Discuss current and potential future initiatives regarding updates / expansions to the Toolkit and broad dissemination.
Moderator:
Frank David, MD, PhD
Director, Strategic Advisors, Leerink Swann
Who Should Attend:
- Editors and journal staff members.
17 – The Story of the Journal
- Barbara Meyers Ford, President, Meyers Consulting Services
- John Childs, Retired Senior Director, Publications, Optical Society of America
Part 1: Wonderful events occur when scholars, researchers, and practitioners share the results of their efforts in a special transfer of knowledge through their intellectual homes – their journals. The building of a discipline, issue by issue and article by article, supports the innovations and subsequent applications that advance our society. How did the journal come about? Why has it persisted for so long? How is it evolving as environmental factors dictate it must in order to remain viable?
Part 2: How best to record your journal’s story? There are various types of a “journal history” that can be written from running a simple chronological account to the widest of settings encompassing the publishing world in which the journal operates and how that external world plays a part in shaping what a journal is and becomes.
Contributions from the audience will be heartily encouraged. Bring your journalÕs historical anecdotes, along with the ways you have captured its history, to share with your colleagues!
Learning Objectives:
- We hope to educate and entertain our colleagues with the origins of the journal which is at the heart of many of their professional lives.
- Understanding the past allows us to better function in the present and prepare for the future.
- What can we learn from the development of the journal over the last several centuries?
- When given the responsibility of writing your journalÕs history you have various approaches to consider. These will be explored and discussed by a veteran journal editor.
Moderator:
Barbara Meyers Ford
President, Meyers Consulting Services
Who Should Attend:
- Anyone who works with journals, wants to work with journals, or has worked with journals and would enjoy having their work placed in context by exploring the history of journals.
18 – Navigating the Bermuda Triangle: Dodgy Journal-Author-Industry Relationship
- Cynthia E Dunbar, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Blood, American Society of Hematology
- Maja Zecevic, PhD, MPH, North American Senior Editor, The Lancet
- Alfred , MS, Director, Medical Publications, Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals
“Study Sees a Slant in Articles on Drugs”, “For ScienceÕs Gatekeepers, a Credibility Gap”, “Side Effects May Include Lawsuits”. Newspaper headlines often call into question the scientific integrity of publications reporting results from industry-sponsored clinical trials. In this session you will learn about the steps journal editors take to prevent bias in industry-sponsored publications and how industry policies have changed over the years to ensure Good Publication Practices are followed.
Learning Objectives:
- Participants will understand past issues related to bias and conflict of interest in industry-sponsored publications.
- Participants will learn how journal policies and practices have evolved to help ensure that published articles of industry-sponsored research are unbiased.
- Participants will learn how industry practices related to publications have evolved to ensure alignment with Good Publication Practices.
Moderator:
Holly Zoog
Director, Medical Writing, Amgen
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
19 – Point-Counterpoint: Should Authors or Journals Define Authorship?
- Patricia K. (Patty) Baskin, Executive Editor, Neurology, American Academy of Neurology
- Denis G. Baskin, Professor of Medicine, University of Washington & Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Over the years, discussions about authorship in the publication community have been passionate. Many journals have adopted the authorship policies put in place by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, while others have extended or modified these criteria. Often overlooked in these discussions are the perspectives of the authors. In a Point-Counterpoint format, the speakers in this session focus on authorship policies from the differing perspectives of scientists who author manuscripts and the scientific journals that publish their findings. One speaker will argue that journal authorship policies are unnecessarily restrictive, while the other will argue that authorship criteria should be even more tightly defined by the journals.
Learning Objectives:
- To learn about reasons for journal authorship policies.
- To learn about the attitudes of scientists about the authorship criteria of journals.
- To learn about the role authorship plays in the professional lives of scientists.
- To learn about ethical aspects of authorship.
Moderator:
Kenneth F. Heideman
Director of Publications, American Meteorological Society
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
20 – Supplemental Data: Questions and Considerations
- Helen Atkins, Editorial Director, AACR, Bonnie Lawlor, Executive Director, National Federation of Advanced Information Services,
- Suzanne Rosenzweig, Director of Scientific Publications, Society for Neuroscience
- Sasha Schwarzman, Information Systems Analyst, American Geophysical Union
The last decade has brought a substantial increase in the amount of supplemental data submitted to journals, but controversy abounds about the value of this material, the way it should be handled, and whether it should even be published. Fundamental questions include whether data should be peer reviewed (and if so, how not to overburden reviewers), how publishing this data can impact journal integrity, the value of data sharing, the limits and costs of data storage, and whether journals should impose limits on how much supplemental material they will publish. Join us to find out what issues journals should consider and what practices they should follow if they publish supplemental data or are considering doing so.
Learning Objectives:
- Discuss the pros and cons of publishing supplemental data.
- Discuss how journal policies on supplemental data relate to transparency and journal integrity.
- Explore whether peer review of supplemental data is feasible, and if so, what form it should take.
- Explore whether data storage limits and costs are an important consideration or not.
- Present best practices for journals that publish supplemental data.
Moderator:
Carissa A. Gilman
Managing Editor, American Cancer Society
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
21 – Social Media Metrics
- Angela Collom, Senior Communications Associate, American College of Physicians
- Bob Sumner, Editorial Coordinator, Clinical Chemistry, AACC
This session will discuss ways in which journal staff who work with the social media for their journal can evaluate,measure and track the impact of social media outreach and success through a blend of quantifiable and qualitative measures.
Moderator:
Mary Beth Schaeffer
Managing Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine
Who Should Attend:
- Publishers, managing editors or editors in chief who are interested in evaluating their own social media presence or starting one.
22 – Choosing or Changing Manuscript Submission Systems
- Jill Jackson, Editorial Administrator, American College of Physicians
- Heide M. Pusztay, Managing Editor, Annals of Thoracic Surgery, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
Are you making the transition from hard copy to electronic submission and peer review? Have you already made the transition but may be interested in switching systems? With the number of journals authors can submit to on the rise and the increasing difficulty of finding reviewers who can devote time to peer review, it is more important than ever to make sure that you have an electronic submission and peer review system that is user-friendly. This session will provide lessons learned from publishers who have made the transition. Topics will include tips on deciding what type of system is right for you (including deciding whether to select an outside vendor who markets an existing product or to build a customized system internally), and process and workflow insights.
Learning Objectives:
- Explore the primary considerations in deciding whether or not to transition to a new submission and peer review system.
- Identify the elements required in a new system.
- Discuss strategies used by journals in identifying systems to review.
- Benchmarks for setting up transition timeline.
Moderator:
Kelly A. Hadsell
Asst. Director Editorial Systems and Journal Manager, Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
23 – Publishing Controversial Research
- Angela Collom, Senior Communications Associate, American College of Physicians
- Steve Majewski, Senior Public Relations, American College of Physicians
Twice in a little more than a year, Annals of Internal Medicine managed to push the buttons of what seemed like the entire medical community. In November 2000, Annals published the guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommending against screening mammography in women younger than 50 without a familial history of breast cancer. In August of 2010, it electronically published The Affordable Care Act and the Future of Clinical Medicine: The Opportunities and Challenges, written by two physicians and a lawyer employed by the U.S. government. The former was published in the midst of the health care debate and the latter soon after passage of The Affordable Care Act, resulting in accusations of ulterior motives and hidden agendas. This session will discuss how to prepare in advance of publishing controversial topics. In addition, it will give advice on how to manage issues before and after publication.
Learning Objectives:
- How to prepare in advance of publishing controversial topics.
- How to do damage control in the event of an unexpected controversy.
Moderator:
Mary Boylan
Managing Editor, American College of Physicians
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
24 – Build a Better Style Guide
- Dawn McCoy, Managing Editor, ASN Kidney News, American Society of Nephrology
- Peter Olson, Senior Copyediting Coordinator, Dartmouth Journal Services
You wouldn’t expect a mechanic to fix your 2011 Toyota Camry using a 1998 owner’s manual with half the pages torn out. Nor should you expect a copyeditor to edit your journal using a similarly obsolete or insufficient style guide. Whether they’re disjointed, fragmented, outdated, or under-documented, many journal style guides simply don’t give copyeditors or manuscript editors the tools they need to perform their job quickly, efficiently, consistently, or correctly. In this session, the speakers will demonstrate the profound impact that a comprehensive, well-structured, user-friendly style guide can have on the editorial process and will offer tips for style guide development, augmentation, and enhancement.
Learning Objectives:
- Identifying the critical components of a journal style guide.
- Exploring different modes of style guide organization, language, and structure.
- Discussing effective methods of cooperative and effective style guide development.
- Recognizing the importance and challenges of maintaining an up-to-date style guide.
Moderator:
John Breithaupt
Technical Sales Support Specialist, Dartmouth Journal Services/The Sheridan Group
Who Should Attend:
- This session will appeal to managing editors, publishers, manuscript editors, copyeditors, production editors, and anyone who relies on a journal’s editorial style guidelines on a routine basis.
25 – When You Can’t Get All That You Want: The Art of Doing With Less
- Michelle Hache, Director of Marketing and Audience Development, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
- Tracey DePellegrin Connelly, Executive Editor, GENETICS and G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, Richard Lane, Web Editor, The Lancet
How can independent publishers with small (and sometimes shrinking) staff and limited budgets hold their own in a publications marketplace that demands technological innovation and novel delivery of information? Knowing that they cannot afford to have every innovation, however tempting, how do they decide which technological tools will be of interest and lasting value to their readers (e.g., surveys)? How then can they implement the chosen technology with their current staff? Does workload need to be realigned and old duties pruned away to make way for the new? Is anything lost in the process and is the tradeoff worth it? Can independent publishers sometimes be more nimble in implementing these innovations than publishing conglomerates? Representatives from three independent publishers will provide case studies exploring the art of selecting tools of lasting value to their readership, the challenges of realigning workflow to accommodate these changes, and the successes that can result.
Learning Objectives:
- To learn techniques for choosing which available technology has the most relevance and impact for your readers.
- To learn how others have altered workflow to accommodate new work processes.
Moderator:
Devora Krischer
Consulting Medical Editor, CVS Caremark
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editors/Publishers
Tuesday, 3 May, 2011
Plenary Address:
Keith A. Baggerly, PhD, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center
We examine several related papers purporting to use microarray-based signatures of drug sensitivity derived from cell lines to predict patient response. Patients in clinical trials were allocated to treatment arms on the basis of these results. However, we show in several case studies that the results incorporate several simple errors that may put patients at risk. One theme that emerges is that the most common errors are simple (e.g., row or column offsets); conversely, it is our experience that the most simple errors are common. We briefly discuss steps we are taking to avoid such errors in our own investigations, and discuss reproducible research efforts more broadly.
Dr. Baggerly is an expert in a field that should not exist. He and his collaborators have defined the field of “forensic bioinformatics”, in which raw data and reported results are used to infer what the methods must have been (because the written descriptions are inadequate). These reconstructions have frequently identified errors, some of which may put patients at risk. An award-winning presenter, he lectures widely on this subject, and his work has been the subject of features in Nature, Science, and the New York Times.
26 – Whats New Copyright?
- Ed Colleran, Senior Director of International Relations, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC)
- Eric Slater, ACS, Manager, Copyright, Permissions, & Licensing, American Chemical Society, Carol Richman, Director of Licensing, SAGE Publications
This session will talk about the newest trends in law and practice and management of copyright, rights, and licensing of content as it pertains to STM publishers, with special attention to issues in developing countries.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand trends in copyright law.
- Understand international issues in copyright law.
- Learn about how associations are finding innovative ways to generate revenue within rights and licensing.
- Hear of successful case studies.
Moderator:
Philippa Jane Benson
Director of Strategic and Business Development, The Charlesworth Group
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
27 – Finding the Right Stuff: Scientists Search for Information
- Alexa Mayo, MLS, AHIP, Associate Director for Services, University of Maryland, Health Sciences and Human Services Library
- M.J. Tooey, MLS, AHIP, FMLA, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and Executive Director, University of Maryland, Health Sciences and Human Services Library
What do today’s scientists expect from the journal literature? In a report from the information front lines, learn about scientists’ expectations and practice in searching for information. This session addresses these questions: what are the information-seeking behaviors of scientists and scientists in training? How do these behaviors affect journal content and findability? In what ways do vendors’ products and tools address current trends in discovery and collaboration? Find out what scientists are asking for – and expecting – in their quest for scientific information. Hear the perspective of librarians serving researchers in a large university setting.
Learning Objectives:
Identify trends in information-seeking behaviors.
- Identify trends in discovery tools and collaboration.
- Understand the impact of user behavior on scientific journals.
Moderator:
Linda J. Kesselring, MS, ELS
Technical Editor/Writer, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Copy Editor/Production Editor
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
28 – Conducting an Editor-in-Chief Search
- Kathey Alexander, Consultant in Professional & Scholarly Publishing
- Esmeralda Galan Buchanan, Journals Director, American Cancer Society
- Kelly A. Hadsell, Asst. Director, Editorial Systems and Journal Manager, Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research
An editor-in-chief search can be a daunting task for any society, publisher, or journal office, and recent changes in institutional attitudes toward editor-in-chief appointments have complicated the task even further. What are the best practices for conducting an editor-in-chief search for both society and proprietary journals? Speakers will discuss the factors that should be considered when embarking on an editor-in-chief search, how to form a search committee, how to draft job description postings, where to post ads and how to spread the word, how to identify and attract top candidates, and how to negotiate with your candidate about details like honoraria and editorial support.
Learning Objectives:
- Review the primary considerations that must be taken into account when embarking on an editor-in-chief search.
- Explore the stakeholders that should be involved in the editor search and the methods by which a search committee should be formed.
- Identify the information that should be included in any posted job descriptions or ads.
- Explore some of the strategies used by journals to identify and attract potential candidates beyond an open call for applications.
- Provide strategies for negotiating about honoraria, editorial support, etc.
Moderator:
Carissa A. Gilman
Managing Editor, American Cancer Society
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
29 – Reproducible Research in Scientific Journals: What’s Needed and Possible?
- Steven Goodman, MD, PhD, Professor of Oncology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University
- Roger Peng, PhD, Associate Professor of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins University
- Keith A. Baggerly, PhD, Professor, Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
This session will cover basic principles of reproducible research, how they can be implemented technically, what measures have been or might be adopted by individual scientific journals to promote reproducible research, and what measures can be implemented only if journals adopt uniform policies. Session will consist of brief presentations and audience discussions.
Learning Objectives:
- Understanding the principles of reproducible research.
- Understanding what journals can do to promote or enforce the reproducibility of the research they publish.
- Understanding what policies the journal community needs to adopt to ensure research reproducibility.
30 – Editors Battling International White Coat Crime, aka, Misconduct
- Susan Garfinkle, PhD, Office of Research Integrity
- James T. Kroll, Head Administrative Investigation, NSF/Office of the Inspector General
This session will include presentations from the international scientific policemen (agencies and consortia) who are called to investigate allegations of research misconduct that involve manuscripts and publications. Learn from these experts what an editor can do to minimize the risk of publishing a manuscript lacking integrity and what to do when an allegation arises.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand what an editor can do to minimize research misconduct.
- Understand how allegations of misconduct are resolved by investigators.
- Learn about resources and tools available to editors.
- Correcting the literature – who and when?
Moderator:
Debbie Parrish
Founder, Parrish Law Offices
Who Should Attend:
- Managing Editor/Publisher
- Editor in Chief
- Writer/Editor
31 – Editorial & Marketing: Synergy = Success
- Barbara Meyers Ford, President, Meyers Consulting Services
- Becky Clark, Marketing Director (Books), Johns Hopkins University Press
- David Marshall, Publisher, SIAM – Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Without effective marketing based on a clear understanding of each publication, societies and commercial publishers should not be surprised to experience an expectation gap among their readers, resulting in fewer renewals and fewer new subscribers/book buyers. This session brings together staff from editorial and marketing components in publishing to discuss how they create a synergy between their departments by communicating regularly and becoming increasingly aware of their colleaguesÕ perspectives and information needs. Success in that communication results in each group doing a better job of understanding the community they serve either through quality editorial content or clear, concise promotional copy.
Learning Objectives:
- How do you talk to your colleagues in editorial? In marketing?
- What types of information are valuable to the other group?
- When is receipt of such information most effective?
- Discussion: Share your experiences (failures & successes) in communicating with your colleagues in the other department.
Moderator:
Barbara Meyers Ford
President, Meyers Consulting Services
Who Should Attend:
- Editorial staff in the position of providing helpful descriptors of content and intended audience. Marketing staff in the position to use such info to create more effective promotions and through their results (and other research) provide reader feedback.