Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review--Part 1

L K Altman

    Lancet (London, England)
    |May 18, 1996
    PubMed
    Summary

    The Ingelfinger rule, adopted by many medical journals, restricts early information release. Critics argue this limits information flow, while proponents cite concerns over un-peer-reviewed accuracy, sparking debate in medical journalism.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    For heart surgeons, many careful steps.

    The New York times on the Web·2002
    Same author

    A short, speckled history of a transplanted hand.

    The New York times on the Web·2002
    Same author

    Surgeons elated by heart patient: artificial-device recipient said to make excellent progress.

    The New York times on the Web·2002
    Same author

    Manufacturer of artificial heart forbids doctors to talk about patient's condition.

    The New York times on the Web·2002
    Same author

    Medical journal apologizes for violating own standards.

    The New York times on the Web·2002
    Same author

    Experts re-examine Dr. Reiter, his syndrome and his Nazi past.

    The New York times on the Web·2002

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Journalism
    • Scientific Publishing Ethics

    Background:

    • The Ingelfinger rule, established 27 years ago, prohibits manuscript publication if previously released elsewhere.
    • This policy has been widely adopted by major medical journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine.

    Discussion:

    • The Ingelfinger rule faces significant controversy regarding its impact on the free flow of scientific information.
    • Proponents argue it prevents the dissemination of potentially inaccurate, un-peer-reviewed data.
    • Critics contend that the rule stifles scientific progress and open communication.

    Key Insights:

    • The debate highlights a fundamental tension between timely information dissemination and rigorous scientific validation.
    • Peer review, while a cornerstone of scientific publishing, is also subject to limitations and scrutiny.
    Keywords:
    Biomedical and Behavioral ResearchNew England Journal of Medicine

    Related Experiment Videos

    Outlook:

    • Further discussion is needed to balance the benefits of early data sharing with the necessity of peer review.
    • Exploring alternative models for pre-publication data sharing and peer review may be warranted.