Exhibit A

Posted by

2

There are times when authors question whether they really need copyediting; occasionally, when edits are especially light and authorial moods particularly dark, I even wonder if the idea of skipping it might even be right. But I am never swayed long, because to copyeditors, it is usually clear how tricky English can be, even in its smallest and seemingly simple parts.

Consider exhibit A: a.

English offers 2 indefinite articles, a and an, and the 11th edition of the AMA Manual of Style includes a simple-but-not-easy rule of when to use them: the a goes before consonant sounds and the an before vowel sounds. The hard part is that the sounds, not the written letters, are the deciding factor.

Because English is nonphonetic, words that start with written consonants (such as h) might begin with a vowel sound (as with hour), and those starting with a vowel may be said as an initial consonant sound (as with one). The only way to know the correct article to use is to know how each word is said aloud.

Medical writing further complicates this with prodigious abbreviations. Exactly half of the letters in the English alphabet, including 8 consonants, are said with initial vowel sounds; for example, an N is pronounced “en” and thus must follow an an when it occurs in acronyms such as NSAID. (The other 7 such consonants are F, H, L, M, R, S, and X.)

Making things even worse, acronyms that are pronounced as words (eg, LASIK) must be matched with the indefinite article that goes with their initial sound (in LASIK, “la-,” which means an a should be used), not the sound that matches the spoken letter (the “el” sound of L, which would go with an an). This means it is essential to know which acronym is said as a word and which as a mere cluster of letters.

It is a relief that nearly all of the letter names that start with consonant sounds (B, C, D, G, J, K, P, Q, T, W, Y, and Z) are for actual consonants, making the a their default article—except that, of course, Y is a consonant (said “ya”) and a vowel (“ee”) with a rather inexplicable spoken name (“why”), and…. well, you get the picture. The complexity never ceases.

Anyone can get this stuff wrong, even native English speakers. For authors using English as a foreign language, including those who largely write in rather than speak the language (and therefore do not sound it out much) and those whose native languages do not include indefinite articles (eg, Japanese, Hindi, Polish, many more)—this might be pretty hard to manage. For everyone, there are copyeditors. We hope to handle this and all the rules in our 1200-page style manual, from a to z.–M. Sophia Newman

Birthplaces and Social and Economic Descriptions of Countries

Posted by

0

There are more examples of bias-free language in the new edition of the AMA Manual of Style, including 2 new entries in the Correct and Preferred Usage chapter, one discussing the birthplace of study participants and the other describing countries in terms of their economic and social factors.

The first new entry discusses not using the term foreign-born. We see this descriptor all the time in studies describing participants who aren’t from the country where the study was conducted but this term may be considered derogatory and should be avoided.

The easiest solution is to say that the person was born outside the country of interest or born abroad. For example, for a study that took place in the United States, use “non–US born participants” or “participants born outside the United States.” Also, it’s preferred to use US or United States vs American or America for clarity.

The second new entry is a little trickier and refers to adjectives used to describe a nation, region, or group in which most of the population lives on far less money—with far fewer basic public services—than the population in wealthy countries.

There is no universal, agreed-on criterion for describing a country in terms of its economic or human “development” and which countries fit these different categories, although there are different reference points, such as a nation’s gross domestic product per capita or the limited nation’s Human Development Index (HDI) compared with that of other nations.

The appropriate term should be based on context and respectfully reflect a specific country’s economic and social situations. The AMA Manual of Style suggests limited-income, low-income, resource-limited, resource-poor, and transitional.

Avoid the terms first world/third world and developed/developing. The term third world is pejorative and archaic, and while developing might seem like an acceptable alternative, it too can be considered pejorative and insensitive to the many complexities of metrics used to measure economic, political, resource, and social factors.

Best practice is to avoid such general terms and use specific terms that reflect what is being compared, such as low-income or high-income for an article comparing countries based on measures such as gross national product per capita.–Tracy Frey

Variants for Mutation

Posted by

0

Other than in reference to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, the anthropomorphic crime-fighting turtles who love pizza, there are few instances in which the term mutation, or any form of the word, has a positive connotation.

Because of this negative connotation and the confusion regarding the definitions of the terms mutation and polymorphism across disciplines, the Human Genome Variation Society recommends avoiding these terms.

The 11th edition of the AMA Manual of Style reinforces this recommendation, as well as the suggestion to instead use the terms sequence variant, sequence variation, alteration, or allelic variant.

In light of this recommendation, the term single-nucleotide variation (SNV) is more frequently being used than single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). To aid readers’ understanding during this transition, it is suggested that SNV be used at first mention, with SNP included in parentheses as follows: “…SNV (formerly SNP).” This should help authors and readers adjust to the recommended language.–Nicole FioRito

Fellowship Designations

Posted by

0

In the 10th edition of the AMA Manual of Style, writers and editors were instructed to remove US fellowship designations and honorary degrees (PhD[Hon]) but to keep non-US designations, such as the British FRCP or FRCS and the Canadian FRCPC. The idea was that many of these non-US designations were attained through a series of qualifying examinations.

For me, following this rule usually meant copying and pasting the designation into an online search engine to find the associated country and then explaining to the authors in a query why some designations were removed while others were allowed to remain.

With the 11th edition, fellowship designations will be removed altogether from the byline. The emphasis will now be placed on academic degrees (which means even honorific addresses like knighthood won’t appear in the byline).

Like the 10th edition, we will continue to publish academic degrees (eg, MD, MBBS, PhD, MS) in bylines as well as licensing and certifications (eg, RN, ELS). We hope this updated style rule will keep byline presentations fair and consistent. –Iris Y. Lo

New Edition, New Rules

Posted by

0

As an introduction to some of the new features of the 11th edition of the AMA Manual of Style, the AMA Style Insider will begin a series of short weekly posts highlighting changes in style rules that editors should begin incorporating into their workflows.

This series will start with updates on a time-sensitive topic that is unfolding not only in medical publications, but also across mainstream media outlets: coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

As the scale of COVID-19 becomes increasingly global, it is essential that editors use nomenclature that is accurate and consistent so readers can trust the integrity of the information being published.

The AMA Manual of Style addresses coronavirus in section 14.14.3, Virus Nomenclature. The disease name COVID-19 was finalized by the World Health Organization and the virus name severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (2 SARS-CoV-2) was finalized by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Updates will be provided in Table 14.14-10, Viruses of Humans.

For continued clinical updates on COVID-19, please visit JAMA Network’s designated page for research and educational resources. For situation updates, please refer to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.–Amanda Ehrhardt

Welcome the 11th Edition of the AMA Manual of Style!

Posted by

4

We are pleased to announce the 11th edition of the AMA Manual of Style, now live at https://www.amamanualofstyle.com/ and shipping in hardcover in a few days.

The manual has been thoroughly updated, including comprehensive guidance on reference citations (including how to cite journal articles, books, reports, websites, databases, social media, and more), an expanded chapter on data display (for the first time in full color), a completely up-to-date chapter on ethical and legal issues (covering everything from authorship and open access to corrections and intellectual property), and updated guidance on usage (from patient-first language and terms to avoid to preferred spelling and standards for sociodemographic descriptors).

The section on nomenclature has undergone thorough review and updating, covering many topics from genetics and organisms to drugs and radiology.

The statistics and study design chapter has been extensively expanded, with more examples of usage and terms that link to a related glossary.

Chapters on grammar, punctuation, abbreviations, capitalization, manuscript preparation, and editing feature refreshed examples and new entries (such as allowance of the “singular they”).

The nearly 1200-page book is enriched by a variety of online features. For example, regular updates to address changes in style or policies will be featured in the Updates section. Any corrections will be made online so that you are always looking at the latest guidelines as you use the manual.

New quizzes will be posted to help new or continuing users learn to master the finer points of AMA style, and the units of measure calculator offers easy conversions between the SI system and conventional units, as well as the metric system.

We welcome questions and comments on the manual: write to stylemanual@jamanetwork.org or find us on Twitter (@AMAManual). We look forward to engaging with you. –Stacy Christiansen, for the AMA Manual of Style Committee

Does Freelancing Pay?

Posted by

0

In addition to my duties as a manuscript editor, I pick up freelance editing assignments when I can. At JAMA Network, I am part of a team of many talented editors and proofreaders who collaborate throughout the editing process, but when freelancing, I am often the only line of defense between clients and catastrophe.

Writing and editing, including in the medical sphere, are largely independent work and conducive to freelancing. But they can also be lonely jobs. Who do you bounce ideas off of when you have a tricky question? Where’s IT when your internet goes down? And how do you know if you are charging your clients enough to cover the overhead costs of your freelance business?

That last question is why I was one of more than 1400 medical communicators who participated in the American Medical Writers Association’s 2019 Medical Communication Compensation Survey.

Following a similar structure as the last edition of the survey (published in 2015), the results are broken up into categories for full-time employees and freelancers. Full time was defined as working 32 or more billable hours per week.

Of full-time employees, almost half (46%) reported having a PhD or advanced degree and more than 10 years of experience (42%). The most common employers were pharmaceutical companies (20%), clinical research organizations (14%), medical communications companies (14%), biotechnology companies (9%), medical device companies (8%), health care organizations (7%), and medical schools or universities (7%).

Writers reported a median annual income of $107 000, while editors reported $80 560. The most commonly reported benefits for those employed full time included health insurance (93%), retirement savings plans (85%), life and/or disability insurance (82%), professional development (64%), pretax spending programs (63%), and an annual bonus (60%).

By contrast, of full-time freelance medical communicators, 38% reported having a PhD or other advanced degree, but 72% reported more than 10 years of experience.

There was some overlap with what the first group of employees reported; for freelancers, the most common clients included pharmaceutical companies (21%), medical communications companies (19%), medical education companies (9%), biotechnology companies (8%), medical marketing agencies (6%), medical device companies (5%), and health care organizations (5%).

Full-time writers reported a median annual income of $151 000, while editors reported $77 500. As with the first group of employees, the results note that salaries tend to increase with years worked in the industry.

Because freelancers generally do not receive the same benefits as employees, they tend to charge higher rates to cover expenses (respondents reported an average hourly rate of $116 for writing and $97 for editing). In this survey, respondents reported their most common recurring expenses as professional membership dues, costs of a tax accountant, health insurance, office supplies, and professional development.

The 2019 survey also reported that 55% of all respondents work remotely on a regular basis and of these, 48% only work remotely. This is an industry trend that continues to grow through the use of technology and continued research showing the benefits of remote work.

Organizations, such as the American Medical Writers Association, Council of Science Editors, and Board of Editors in Life Sciences, are valuable in connecting medical communicators with resources and information, especially freelancers or remote workers in need of a network. Sharing data is the core of our careers after all.–Jamie Scott

Breaking It Down

Posted by

1

When you pick up a book you haven’t yet read, do you immediately turn to page 1 and begin reading? Or, do you check out the front cover design to see if the book looks interesting? What about the back cover?

Most stories are broken down in many ways to hook the audience. It’s fairly standard that a book has a promotional blurb on the front cover, a tagline, a 1-sentence summary on the back, a slightly longer summary on the back, and, yes, more promotional blurbs on the back and inside the front cover. Perhaps you learned of the book through a social media post or through a review. What grabs your attention may not grab someone else’s, so breaking a story down in various ways makes it appeal to a larger audience.

The same can be done with scientific research articles. The main text typically follows the IMRAD format (introduction, methods, results, and discussion) to clearly and fully tell the story. The authors detail why they performed the research, how they did it and among whom, what they found, and what it means.

That story is condensed into an abstract, a brief summary that allows readers to determine whether they may find the full article interesting or useful. Should an abstract be too long or technical to pull a reader in, an article can have an even briefer key points section. This could be a bulleted list of important findings or, as in the JAMA Network journals, a list of the question, findings, and meaning of the research.

For social media, perhaps a single summary sentence is needed to fit the constraints of a character limit. For readers who prefer a more visual summary, especially through social media, a visual abstract can be useful. These are eye-catching depictions of the research, often using icons and very brief wording.

Twitter, JAMA (JAMA_current), January 17, 2020.

Medical editors may be tasked with reviewing, editing, or even writing some of these pieces. In doing so, a few tips might be helpful.

First, make sure the shorter piece is consistent with the main article. Numbers should match and any data in the shorter piece should be included in the main article.

Second, make sure the trimmed text doesn’t overstate the study’s results. For example, “This study suggests that X is associated with Y” is different from “X affects Y.”

Third, make sure the most important information is emphasized: “This [study type] examines [primary outcome] in [population].”

Fourth, remember the audience. The short items should be able to draw someone in to read the more technical information in the main article.

A journal article may be the culmination of an investigator’s life’s work or the end of a trial that has cost millions of dollars, which may make an article’s 1-sentence blurb seem measly. However, a patient may search social media to find information on a rare disease, and a post could bring the patient to the full article. A physician may scan key points to see if an article looks interesting enough to read fully. A student could review abstracts to find articles that are helpful for a research project. An investigator might use the full article to replicate the study or as a springboard for further research.

Each breakdown serves a purpose, promoting the right information to the right audience.–Shannon Sparenga

ME Without the MD

Posted by

0

One of the occupational hazards of being a medical editor is the inevitability of occasionally working on a highly technical, highly detailed manuscript on a topic about which you know nothing. You don’t need to have a medical degree to be a medical editor, but how do you edit a paper when you’re not sure whether the item under discussion should treated as a plural, or even as a noun?

Of course, an excellent place to start is the AMA Manual of Style, which can provide a general overview sufficient to navigate the complexities of many topics.

For example, you don’t need to know much about respiratory physiology as long as you remember to check section 15.16 (Pulmonary, Respiratory, and Blood Gas Terminology). You’ll be sprinkling cryptoglyphs like V̇, Pb, and v̅ in no time!

You also don’t need to know how to conduct an F test to know that when you see an F score, it should also include the numerator and denominator of the degrees of freedom in subscript (section 20.9, Glossary of Statistical Terms).

In addition to the searchable AMA Manual of Style, the modern age has also bestowed the gift of internet search engines to help decrypt topics of which you may have no knowledge (and had never previously needed knowledge of, for that matter). If you find yourself looking at a topic you’ve never heard of and the Manual doesn’t cover it, a few minutes perusing sites such as Google, PubMed, and Wikipedia can give you tentative grounds on which to make your stand.

But sometimes even all the treasures of the internet and your trusty AMA Manual of Style combined can’t help and you’re adrift on a sea of statistics, biochemistry, gene expression, or whatever your topical Achilles heel may be.

In such cases, it can be useful to think of a sentence like a math equation—you don’t need to know what the subject means, but if you can look at a sentence and know where the subject is, where the object is, and what kind of verb tense you need, you’re more than halfway there.

And, as always, you can and should rely on the author to clarify and correct as needed. The ultimate goal of your work is to improve the author’s work, and that can only be truly accomplished through teamwork.–Rebecca Palmer