寻医问药网 > 关于Who is Ivan Schwab?的问题

关于Who is Ivan Schwab?的问题

文发布者:
来源:寻医问药网
关于Who is Ivan Schwab?的原因,关于Who is Ivan Schwab?的相关知识。     1 Editor

    2 UK editor

    3 Website editor

    Author qualifications

    Keywords: author qualifications

    We live in the age of biography. They fill and spill over the shelves of bookstores. They have become gigantic in length (example, Lord Black’s new biography of Franklin Delano Roosevelt is 1278 pages in length).1 It is perhaps, therefore, not surprising that Papalkar and Francis in their letter to the journal this month ask, "Who is Ivan Schwab?"2 Actually, if we understand them correctly they are really asking, "What are Ivan Schwab’s qualifications to write about interesting aspects of the eye in various animal species?" The fact that Ivan Schwab is a renowned corneal surgeon with a side interest in the eye in evolution is interesting. That he plans a sabbatical in the homeland of Papalkar and Francis to study with a marine biologist is perhaps even more noteworthy. Yet, is he qualified to write on these topics? He does not have a PhD in zoology, animal behaviour, etc. As with most American physicians he has only a single degree, an MD. Is any of this important? Are the covers of the journal less interesting because of Schwab’s amateur’s status? Are his descriptions any less provocative because he lacks validation with a university degree in zoology, etc?

    The question Papalkar and Francis ask—who is qualified to contribute to the journal?—is an important one. Yet, we strongly disagree with their conclusions. We would assert that qualifications necessary to contribute to the scientific literature include intellectual curiosity, knowledge of appropriate study design, and most important—honesty. Listing authors’ degrees and academic appointments seems unlikely to address the question of whether they are qualified to write on a specific topic. Reviewers and readers alike will come to their own conclusions after carefully reading the paper in question. Or to make the point another way—did Linus Pauling’s multiple degrees and two Nobel prizes make him qualified to wax on about the wonders of vitamin C?

    We fear that what Papalkar and Francis refer to as "qualifications" are in fact primarily statements about "authority." After all, the hospital trolley boy may be very qualified to write about first hand observations in the hospital. The history of medicine is replete with tales of authority suppressing new, important information from those with a less authoritative voice. For example, Richard Horton, in his discussion of Sherwin Nuland’s new book, The Doctor’s Plague: Germs, Childbed Fever, and the Strange Story of Ignac Semmelweis, points out that although Semmelweis "turned obstetrics into a respectable science" he also "revealed how professional eminence and authority could breed stupidity and bitter jealousy."3 The resistance of the Viennese medical establishment to the young Semmelweis’s investigations of epidemic childbed fever is a sordid tale of well respected, seemingly qualified medical authorities obstructing the dissemination of an important medical discovery.

    We do agree with one aspect of Papalkar and Francis’s letter—the journal should be consistent in "appending qualifications." We would suggest that the journal should not publish any such "qualifications" or "academic titles." We would also propose that perhaps masking the authors’ names and qualifications from reviewers might provide for a more uniform and fair review process that would make it less likely that second rate papers from world authorities are published and that original thought provoking ones from less well known physicians are not overlooked. Although we do not agree with the thesis of the letter by Papalkar and Francis we wish to thank them for bringing the issue to our readers. We would encourage readers of the BJO to express their opinions as a "rapid response."

    REFERENCES

    Black C. Franklin Delano Roosevelt. champion of freedom. New York: Public Affairs, 2003.

    Papalkar D, Francis IC. Authors’ qualifications. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1227–8.

    Horton R. The fool of pest. The New York Review of Books 2004;51:1051–6. (文章出处:《英国眼科学杂志》)
相关问答:
  • WHO CAN HELP ME?
  • who can help me?
  • who can help me ?!!.
  • WHO CAN HELP ME?
  • WHO 狂犬病潜伏期
  • “子宫内膜间质肉瘤(WHO低级别),免疫.
  • 老公的精液报告SPERMCONC14.2.

  • 相关资讯:
  • 合气道vs跆拳道who怕who?
  • WHO反对“神奇药丸”
  • WHO发表癌症控制报告
  • WHO发布基本药物用药指南
  • WHO警告:预防SARS卷土重来
  • WHO发表癌症控制报告
  • WHO发布基本药物用药指南
  • WHO质疑标准的结核病疗法
  • WHO首次颁布《艾滋病治疗指南》
  • WHO警告:全球爆发禽流感疫情危险增加
  • WHO:流感危机将至 疫苗存在.
  • WHO:争取2020年消除致盲性沙眼全球.
  • 健康图谱

    疾病大全

    [健康购物好去处]健康商城
    精彩推荐