We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Editorial |

Thanking Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Readers—Constancy in a Time of Change

Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD; Richard M. Glass, MD; Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD, MPH
JAMA. 2000;283(15):2016-2017. doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2016.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


The years 1999-2000 could serve quite well as a period of marked changes in biomedical publications. Several important developments involving scientific publications during this time represent significant changes that may be recognized as turning points for years to come. Perhaps most noteworthy is the tremendous capabilities of electronic information dissemination, with the ever-increasing power, speed, reach, and convenience of the Internet. This development has revolutionized and probably changed forever the dissemination of scientific information both from centralized repositories and institutions1 and from individual journals.2 In addition, concerns about ensuring proper attribution and credit for authorship of scientific articles have led to efforts to define the exact contributions of each author of a published article more precisely and to changes in ways to report these contributions more completely.3,4 Moreover, the dismissal of the editors-in-chief of 2 major general medical journals in 1999 resulted in careful reexamination of and substantial changes in the relationship between editors and owners of scientific journals.5,6 Yet, regardless of the magnitude or potential far-reaching implications of these changes and other challenges involving scientific publications, the importance of and appreciation for 3 key constituencies—authors, peer reviewers, and readers—undoubtedly have and must remain unchanged.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

2 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Involvement of HIV patients in treatment-related decisions. J Int AIDS Soc 2014;17(4 Suppl 3):19600.

Care at the Close of Life: Evidence and Experience
Overcoming the False Dichotomy of Curative vs Palliative Care for Late-Stage HIV/AIDS: "Let Me Live the Way I Want to Live, Until I Can't"

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Evidence to Support the Update