Questions From Users of the Manual

[Editor’s Note: I love the idea of referencing a sound!]

Q: How should a “free sound” from the website Freesound.org be cited in the reference list?

A: We would recommend the following for citation format, altering the accessed date to reflect the date it was accessed:

Crickets.  http://freesound.org/people/rfhache/sounds/52755/.  Posted May 2, 2008.  Accessed February 1, 2016.

We are revising our manual now for the 11th edition and will be including many more examples of electronic references.—Cheryl Iverson, MA

Raising (Rearing?) Hell

Besides the dropping energy levels and unsightly wrinkles that daily remind me of my advancing age, I never expected an Associated Press style rule—beaten into me as a young reporter—to deliver the one-two punch that landed me squarely into the “old fogies” category.

I was editing a JAMA Viewpoint about a fairly modern question involving gender identity, hormone levels, and eligibility for women’s athletic events when my knee began to jerk at first sight of the descriptor “raised,” as it applies to how or where someone grew up.

As soon as I saw the word, I heard harsh tones in my head and felt the breeze of a wagging finger: “Corn and cattle are raised, people are reared!” So I dutifully changed “raised” to “reared” as the AP Stylebook commands. Soon, I sent the proof off for review by the senior editors and the authors.

As I had predicted, one of the medical editors deleted “reared” and inserted “raised.” I knew I was right about this! I was poised to cross off the edit when I thought, “Maybe I should look at a newer version of a stylebook, just to see if the rules have slackened over the decades.” (Our own AMA Manual of Style is silent on the matter.) My office was too cluttered to find the newest Associated Press Stylebook, so I turned to Google.

The first search result was titled “Grammar Gremlins: Is it ‘reared’ or ‘raised’?” I clicked—who says a pithy headline doesn’t draw in a reader?  Knoxville News Sentinel Columnist Don Ferguson, who by his photo looks older than me, offered his first sentence:

A recent Associated Press report about an accused terrorist said the man was “born and reared” in America.

He followed with,

Did this use of “reared” instead of “raised” say something about the age of the writer?

Oh my goodness! Who would have thought that old style rule would say more about me than my slowing gait? He noted that youngsters favor “raised.” He cited Garners Modern American Usage’s calculations that “born and raised” is used 8 times more often than “born and reared.”

As with most of often-confused words, he also noted that dictionaries say either is correct.

I dropped my pen and conceded the edit.—Beverly Stewart

 

 

 

Questions From Users of the Manual

Q: Should “least squares mean” be hyphenated? Can the acronym LSM be used or is LS preferred?

A: In the glossary in the statistics chapter, you’ll see that there is no hyphen used in “least squares method,” so I would extrapolate from that to say no hyphen is required in “least squares mean.” If this term comes up so frequently in the manuscript that you feel an abbreviation is warranted, we indicate no preference for what that abbreviation is. Just be sure it’s used consistently throughout.—Cheryl Iverson, MA

Quiz Yourself

Number needed to treat (NNT) is the number of patients who must be treated with an intervention for a specific period to prevent 1 bad outcome or result in 1 good outcome. What is the reciprocal of the NNT? Use your mouse to highlight the answer:

Absolute risk reduction, which is the proportion in the control group experiencing an event minus the proportion in the intervention group experiencing an event, is the reciprocal of the NNT.

See §20.9 for a Glossary of Statistical Terms.—Laura King, MA, MFA, ELS

What Time Is It?

There are dozens of recognized time zones throughout the world. Time zone information may occasionally be included in scientific writing, depending on whether such data are useful for comprehension. In general, however, time zone information may be omitted. If included, the zone’s abbreviation may or may not be added in parentheses (some time zone abbreviations have more than one possible expansion, eg, BST stands for Bangladesh standard time [Asia], Bougainville standard time [Pacific], and British summer time [Europe]).

The international team of investigators scheduled a video conference via Skype at 9 am CST (central standard time) to discuss issues concerning its upcoming clinical trial.

The circadian rhythm aspects of sleep and wakefulness allow us researchers to understand both the normal physiology and the pathophysiology of occasional sleepiness related to shift work among health care workers and to travel across time zones.

Institutions that are interested in applying to become a center for excellence may participate in a webinar on September 12, 2017, from 3 pm to 5 pm EST.

A very useful resource for current times worldwide is available at The World Clock.—Roxanne K. Young, ELS

Questions From Users of the Manual

Q: If I have a title with a colon, is the first word after the colon capitalized or lowercased?

A: If you are speaking about title and subtitle on the manuscript itself, every major word in the title and subtitle, as well as the first word of title and subtitle, would begin with a capital letter.

Endless and Essential:  The Tug-of-War Over Off-Label Use

If you are speaking about the title and subtitle of a journal article as it appears in the reference list, only the first word of the title and any proper nouns would begin with a capital letter.

19. Incollingo J. Endless and essential:  the tug-of-war over off-label use. Cataract & Refractive Surgery Today. 2016;16(5):19-27.

More about capitalization of titles can be found in chapter 10.—Cheryl Iverson, MA

Quiz Yourself

There are 5 instances of jargon in the following sentence. Can you identify them all?

The patient’s physical exam findings were unremarkable and her labs were in the normal range, so she was released from the emergency room and prepped for surgery.

Highlight below for the answer:

The patient’s physical examination findings were unremarkable and her laboratory test results were in the reference range, so she was released from the emergency department and prepared for surgery.

Words and phrases that can be understood in conversation but are vague, confusing, or depersonalizing are generally inappropriate in formal scientific writing. See §11.4 of the AMA Manual of Style for a list of jargon.—Laura King, ELS

Questions From Users of the Manual

Q: Is it necessary to repeat the manufacturer name, city, and country after every repeated mention of a product, or is it sufficient to cite this information only after the first appearance?

A: Mention of the manufacturer’s name after the first mention should be sufficient. Also, please look at our (free) online Updates.

UPDATE:  Manufacturer information for Equipment, Devices, and Reagents:  In section 15.5 (page 583 in the print book), we will no longer require the inclusion of the location of the manufacturer. This is so easy to look up online, should anyone desire more specific details, that we believe it is not necessary to continue to require this. This change was made October 4, 2011.

You’ll see that we no longer require the manufacturer’s location to be included.—Cheryl Iverson, MA

 

Quiz Yourself

A scientist develops data while working at Harvard University. She then moves to Stanford University, where she publishes an article using the original data in JAMA. Who owns the data?

a. Harvard University
b. Stanford University
c. Scientist
d. JAMA

Use your mouse to highlight the answer:   Harvard University

In scientific research, 3 primary arenas exist for ownership of data: the government, the commercial sector, and academic or private institutions or foundations. Although an infrequent occurrence, when data are developed by a scientist without a relationship to a government agency, a commercial entity, or an academic institution, the data are owned by that scientist. Any information produced by an office or employee of a government agency in the course of his or her employment is owned by the government. Data produced by employees in the commercial sector (eg, a pharmaceutical, device, or biotechnology company, health insurance company, or for-profit hospital or managed care organization) are most often governed by the legal relationship between the employee and the commercial employer, granting all rights of data ownership and control to the employer. According to guidelines established by Harvard University in 1988 and subsequently adopted by other US academic institutions, data developed by employees of academic institutions are owned by the institutions (§5.6.1, Ownership and Control of Data, pp 179-183 in print).—Laura King, ELS

Putting P Values in Their Place

Although I am not a statistician, I find something very appealing about mathematics and statistics and am pleased when I find a source to help me understand some of the concepts involved. One of these sources intersects with my obsession with politics: Nate Silver’s website fivethirtyeight.com. Yesterday, during a scan of fivethirtyeight’s recent posts, this one by Christie Ashwanden caught my eye: “Statisticians Found One Thing They Can Agree On: It’s Time to Stop Misusing P-Values.”

P values and data in general are frequently on the minds of manuscript editors at the JAMA Network. Instead of just making sure that statistical significance is defined and P values provided, we always ask for odds ratios or 95% confidence intervals to go with them. P values are just not enough anymore, and Ashwanden’s article was really useful in helping me understand why these additional data are needed (as well as making me feel better about not fully understanding the definition of a P value—it turns out I’m not alone. According to another fivethirtyeight article, “Not Even Scientists Can Easily Explain P-Values”). One of the bad things about relying on P values alone is that they are used as a “litmus test” for publication. Findings with low P values but not contextual data are published, yet important studies with high P values are not—and this has real scientific and medical consequences. These articles explain why P values only can  be a cause for concern.

And then there was even more information about statistical significance to think about. A colleague shared a link to a story on vox.com by Julia Belluz: “An Unhealthy Obsession With P-Values Is Ruining Science.” This article a discussed a recent report in JAMA  by Chavalarias et al “that should make any nerd think twice about p-values.” The recent “epidemic” of statistical significance means that “as p-values have become more popular, they’ve also become more meaningless.” Belluz also provides a useful example of what a P value will and will not tell researchers in, say, a drug study, and wraps up with highlights of the American Statistical Association’s guide to using P values.—Karen Boyd