medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Digital)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Impreso)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2009, Número 1

Siguiente >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2009; 23 (1)


Acerca de la normatividad para la publicación de artículos médicos en Acta Ortopédica Mexicana

Gómez GF

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 16
Paginas: 1-2
Archivo PDF: 30.42 Kb.


FRAGMENTO

El fin último de la comunicación en medicina es ayudarnos a los médicos a tomar decisiones de conductas y/o acciones terapéuticas; afortunadamente existen diversas herramientas de cómo hacerlo. De todas ellas, el «estándar de oro» son las publicaciones en revistas avaladas a través de sistemas de revisión por expertos (peer-review process), aceptadas en índices nacionales e internacionales (PubMed/Index Medicus, Latindex, Artemisa, etc.); estos criterios se aplican tanto a revistas escritas como a publicaciones electrónicas.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2000; 284: 3043-5.

  2. Fuson RL, Sherman M, Vleet JV, Wendt T: Current concepts review-the conduct of orthopaedic clinical trials. J Bone Joint Surg-Am 1997; 79: 1089-98.

  3. U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). http://www.hippa.org/

  4. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication (Updated October 2008). International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. http://www.icmje.org

  5. Pitkin RM, Branagan MA, Burmeister LF: Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. JAMA 1999; 281: 1110-1.

  6. Yank V, Rennie D: Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles in the Lancet. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 661-70.

  7. Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, DeAngelis CD: Authorship for research groups. JAMA 2002; 288: 3166-8.

  8. Godlee F, Jefferson T: Peer Review in Health Sciences. London: BMJ Books; 1999.

  9. Designing Clinical Research, eds. Stephen Hulley, Steven Cummings, 1988. Williams y Wilkins, Baltimore pp 128-49.

  10. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Oxford University. http://www.cebm.net

  11. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D; for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials. JAMA 2001;285:1987-91. http://www.consort-statement.org

  12. Reporting cohort, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. ESTROBE Panel. http://www.strobe-statement.org

  13. Reporting meta-analysis studies. QUORUM, http://www.consort satement.org/mod_product/uploads/QUOROM%20 Statement%201999.pdf

  14. Bailar JC III, Mosteller F: Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals: amplifications and explanations. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108: 266-73.

  15. Scientific Style and Format. The CBE Manual for Authors, Editors and Publishers, 6th ed. Cambridge. University Press.

  16. Davidoff F for the CSE Task Force on Authorship. Who’s the author? Problems with biomedical authorship and some possible solutions. Science Editor. Jul-Aug 2000; 23(4): 111-9.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com