Updates, news and events from the Medicine Editorial Office.
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Are you interested in joining the Medicine editorial board as an Academic Editor? In this role, you would play an essential part in ensuring that accepted content is scientifically and ethically sound, and in compliance with standard reporting guidelines.
Objectives for Academic Editors
- Supervise the review and adjudication of manuscripts submitted to your area of expertise.
- Help communicate the results of peer review to facilitate the revision of the submitted manuscripts.
- Help recruit further Academic Editors where submission volume is high.
Remuneration and Term of Office
- Academic Editors will serve for a renewable term of 1 year.
- There will be no direct financial remuneration, but Academic Editors will be acknowledged for their work on
the Journal website.
For more information, please register your interest (including an updated CV) via email to Senior Publisher, Duncan MacRae: firstname.lastname@example.org
Tuesday, July 01, 2014
To read the complete text of the article described in this post, click here.
A total of 2.78 million tickets were sold to the London Paralympic Games, making the Paralympic Games the World’s third biggest sporting event, behind the Olympic games and the FIFA World Cup. The movement is genuinely global – 174 countries have National Paralympic Committees – and participation is increasing, with more than 6000 internationally registered athletes in the sport of Athletics alone.
Classification systems are integral to Paralympic sport. Each Paralympic sport has a classification system which aims to group athletes that have impairments that cause approximately the same amount of difficulty in that sport. The aim of this process is to try to ensure that the athletes who succeed are not simply those that have less severe impairments than their competitors. In other words, Paralympic classes comprise athletes who have impairments that cause the same amount of difficulty in sport. In this regard, Paralympic classification systems are similar to systems of classification used in most (if not all) modern competitive sports. For example, sports such as boxing and rowing use classification systems based on body mass – people in each class have about the same body mass, minimizing the impact that body size has on the outcome of the competition and ensuring that the athletes who succeed are not simply those who are larger than their competitors. In athletics there are separate classes for males and females and these minimize the impact that sex has on the outcome of competition. 
Evidence-based decision making in classification is an essential means of enhancing classification legitimacy, but evidence underpinning current methods of classification is weak. In 2007 the International Paralympic Committee mandated the development of evidence-based methods of classification for all Paralympic sports and the IPC Position Stand on Classification outlines key requirements for the development of evidence-based systems, including valid, reliable methods for assessing impairment. Research in this area is limited, however researchers are beginning to investigate methods that may contribute to evidence-based classification in Paralympic Sport.[4, 5]
This study significantly contributes towards the development of evidence-based classification in Paralympic Sport by evaluating ratio-scaled measures of strength assessment. Currently in classification, strength is assessed using manual muscle testing which is ordinal-scaled, making it unsuitable for use in evidence-based Paralympic classification. Ratio-scaled measures of strength assessment were therefore developed to allow the determination of the relationship between impairment and performance. These measures were assessed in the current study for reliability, their relationship to body size and to obtain an indication of normal performance ranges.
Results indicate that this strength test battery is reliable, an essential property of tests that would have to be implemented internationally should they be used in classification. The results also indicate that the relationship between the measures and body size should be considered in further research to ensure that no athlete is disadvantaged during the classification process. The development of gender-specific normal performance ranges from this study will allow the interpretation of strength assessment results in athletes with neuromusculoskeletal impairments.
1. International Paralympic Committee, Annual Report. 2012, International Paralympic Committee: Bonn, Germany.
2. Tweedy, S.M., Vanlandewijck, Y.C, International Paralympic Committee Position Stand - Background and Scientific Rationale for Classification in Paralympic Sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2011. 45(4): p. 259-69.
3. International Paralympic Committee, IPC Classification Code September 2007. 2007, Bonn: International Paralympic Committee. 15.
4. Beckman, E.M., Tweedy, S.M, Evaluating the validity of activity limitation tests for use in Paralympic Classification. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2009. 43(13): p. 1067-72.
5. Oh, Y., Burkett, B., Osboirough, C., Formosa, D., Payton, C., London 2012 Paralympic Swimming: passive drag and the classifciation system. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2013. 47: p. 838-843.
Friday, June 27, 2014
Volume 93 Issue 4, released June 27, 2014, marks the first fully open access issue of Medicine, as it transitions to a open access publication. The four articles published in this issue are all available under a Creative Commons 4.0 international license, as selected by the authors, and are immediately accessible to readers without a subscription.
For information on Medicine, open access, and submissions, please visit our Open Access Information page.
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
A significant element of Medicine's open access content is the tight integration of standard reporting guidelines into the submission and review process. The EQUATOR Network, which actively promotes the wider use of reporting guidelines, included a brief item on Medicine's implementation of reporting guidelines on its web site.
Guidelines and Article Types
Medicine's article types are each based on a particular reporting guideline, and supporting documentation (ie, checklist and/or flow diagram) are required elements for submission. For example, rather than a generic "Research Study" article type, Medicine categorizes article types by the applicable reporting guideline (eg, "Observational Study [STROBE Compliant]).
Guidelines and the Review Process
As a required item for submission, the accurate completion of the guideline checklist is assessed during the journal's technical check. Additionally, reviewers are required to provide a response to one of the checklist items, in order to confirm that the author has accurately completed the form (note: the author-completed checklist is blinded from the reviewer's version of the manuscript).
Medicine's purpose in closely integrating reporting guidelines into the submission and review process mirrors that of The EQUATOR Network - to translate the principles of responsible research reporting into practice.
For more information on the EQUATOR Network and reporting guidelines, please visit the EQUATOR Network.
For information about submitting to Medicine, please visit our "For Authors" page.
Sunday, March 30, 2014
As the first step in Medicine®'s transition to a fully open access publication, we are pleased to announce that Medicine® is now accepting open access submissions across a broad scope of medical specialties and sub-specialties.
Medicine®'s newly introduced open access article types (listed below) are based upon key reporting guidelines, as defined by the EQUATOR Network. Authors should prepare their manuscripts in accordance with the appropriate guidelines(s) and/or checklist(s) for each type of article.
- Clinical Trial/Experimental Study (CONSORT Compliant)
- Observational Study (STROBE Compliant)
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA Compliant)
- Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE Compliant)
- Diagnostic Accuracy Study (STARD Compliant)
- Quality Improvement Study (SQUIRE Compliant)
- Economic Evaluation Study (CHEERS Compliant)
- Clinical Case Report (CARE Compliant)
For further information regarding reporting guidelines, authors should consult the EQUATOR Network web site (http://www.equator-network.org), which maintains a useful, up-to-date list of guidelines as they are published, with links to articles and checklists.
For more information on submitting to Medicine, please review the Open Access FAQ and the updated Instructions for Authors.