Dictionaries: An Editor’s Best Friend

Posted by

1

Part of the fun of editing medical content is learning all about the newest treatments and scientific advances, but as someone without a science background, I find myself looking for resources that can help me understand some of the more technical terminology.

You may ask, “What about Google?” Google offers the collective knowledge of the Internet right at our fingertips, right? Well, sort of. Sometimes I don’t have the time to sort through all of the results. I want the correct answer now! Subject-specific medical dictionaries are just the thing when I’m in a hurry (which is almost always because DEADLINES).Two resources that I use are A Manual of Orthopaedic Terminology (print) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) dictionaries (web).

In the days when I edited orthopaedic surgery manuscripts, A Manual of Orthopaedic Terminology (Nelson FR, Blauvelt CT. A Manual of Orthopaedic Terminology. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders, 2015) was my go-to resource for terminology related to musculoskeletal disease, brief descriptions of imaging techniques, and common orthopaedic abbreviations. The section on fracture classifications saved me from sifting through a ton of search engine results. Don’t even get me started on the eponymous procedures and approaches! As much as I love this resource, it’s not comprehensive. My heart sank when I used this book to look up surgical approaches for hand surgery and saw “Surgical approaches are too numerous and complicated to describe here. Refer to Canale ST, Beaty J, 2013.”Um, okay.

I found the web-based NCI dictionaries one day when I was working on an oncology manuscript and found myself turning to Google for the 10th time in 2 hours (I love you, Google, but this is ridiculous!). Enter the NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms and the NCI Drug Dictionary to save the day. Of the 2 dictionaries, I use the Dictionary of Cancer Terms the most. The definitions aren’t too technical, and new terms and definitions are added monthly. Right now, 8386 terms are included. The search interface is easy to use, and allows you to search for partial terms.

As you might expect, the definitions and descriptions in the NCI Drug Dictionary are more technical than those in the Dictionary of Cancer Terms. In addition to definitions, the Drug Dictionary entries include alternate drug names and hyperlinks to more information on each drug (such as active clinical trials using the drug). The NCI Drug Dictionary was useful when I recently came across a table with an alphabet soup of chemotherapy regimens. What exactly is the FOLFIRI regimen?

Let’s use the NCI Drug Dictionary to break this down. A search of FOLFIRI returns 4 results (click for larger):

Those definitions seem pretty straightforward. They even include the trade names for some of the regimens (FOLFIRI-Avastin). The NCI Drug Dictionary seems like a good place to begin a search, but it may be a good idea to cross-check some of the drug names using the USAN Council website; “5-fluorouracil” may not be the preferred name. Clicking on the link for the regimen will redirect you to a page that lists the full definition and another link to the NCI Thesaurus. In this case, the full definitions are short and are right here in the search results—no need to click on another link!

Subject-specific dictionaries can be a reliable alternative to wading through thousands of Google results. What about you? Do you use any subject-specific resources? Tell us in the comments.—Juliet Orellana

Advice After Mischief Is Like Medicine After Death

Posted by

0

When acquaintances learn that I am an editor, a common response is “I better watch what I say around you.” I would like everyone to watch what they say around me at all times, but for reasons having nothing to do with my career.

Still, that response is often followed by curiosity and questions. Giving advice is one of life’s simple pleasures. Giving advice is even better when someone actually asks for it. Is any writing more concentrated than an advice column? It’s the written equivalent of a shot of absinthe but better for you. My advice hero is Carolyn Hax, and I have also enjoyed Emily Yoffe and Miss Manners. I won’t claim to belong in their illustrious company but I do have the AMA Manual of Style. I don’t think they do.  

I’ve selected questions from the last year whose answers can get you leafing through the manual. As you read these and have questions in turn of your own, remember that, unlike me, the AMA Manual of Style is always there for you.

Dear AMA Style Manual Guru,

I am indexing binomial organism names and have come up with a shortcut that separates the genus from species when the genus is otherwise repeated. Can you help me justify this decision?

Rogue Editor

Dear Rogue Editor,

We are all learners here and I object to the hierarchy implied when you refer to me as a guru. In the interest of collaboration, please call me Sir.

AMA Style Manual Guru

Dear Sir,

I am indexing binomial organism names and have come up with a shortcut that separates the genus from species when the genus is otherwise repeated. Can you help me justify this decision?

Rogue Editor

Dear RE,

No. See 13.1.1, Alphabetization and Sorting.

Dear Sir,

I’m using an acronym that relies on irregular capitalization when spelled out. I am worried that readers will feel misled or as if the acronym is too forced. How can I handle this discrepancy?  Asking for a friend.

Dear Nameless,

You worry too much. Readers will not question the acronym if they follow 10.6, Acronyms and Initialisms. You should too. Or your friend should. Look, you both should. An irregular use of capitalization will be harder for readers to follow than standard capitalization. By the way this column has a word count, so let’s dispense with salutations and sign offs and stick with Q and A.

Q: If you have a hyphenated compound in a page heading, do you capitalize the second half of the word: First-Line Therapy? or First-line Therapy?

A: Because “first-line” appears in Webster’s as a specific term, the AMA Manual of Style indicates that the “l” would be lowercase. See 10.2.2, Hyphenated Compounds. When each part of a hyphenated term carries equal weight, capitalize the initial letter of both words. I always enjoy capitalization questions. Keep them coming.

Q: Even though you prefer capitalization questions, I have a question about pluralization. In a world in which most signage offends grammarian sensibilities (Free Kitten’s to a Good Home), an editor (not unlike you) noted that my paper used “too many and’s.” How should I respond to this editor?

A: See if you can use serial commas instead of successive and’s and look up 9.6, Plurals of Symbols, Letters, Numbers, and Years. Then thank your editor for helping your article attain clarity for readers. You’re welcome.

Q: Why can’t I use the numerical expression of ordinal numbers? They keep getting edited out and I think they are clear and that the visual effect communicates more quickly than spelled ordinals.

A: This is the third (not 3rd) time you’ve asked. I know it sounds harsh but it’s for your own good and someday you’ll thank me. You just can’t. Now stop asking. Numeric expressions of ordinals may be jarring and interrupt the flow of text (see 19.2.5, Ordinals).

Q: I often see the pronoun “one” presented as the number. What’s this whole world coming to?

A: True, the pronoun should be spelled out (19.2.3, One Used as a Pronoun). You may see someone interpret a pronoun as the countable “1,” and it may get into print even when the pronoun precedes a prepositional phrase (“1 of us” for “one of us”). The only assurance I can offer is that no one was harmed in the publication of that phrase and the sun still rises and sets each day.

Q: “Two weeks of symptoms is expected” or “Two weeks of symptoms are expected”?

A: Smart money is on the first choice. A unit of measure uses a singular verb. See 9.2, Collective Nouns. Noun phrases is are funny that way. Your ears may have to adjust to this new knowledge.

Q: I have a father in law problem. He constantly undermines me. My wife is his only daughter, and when I am at the grill (my specialty!), he maneuvers into my area so he can flip the burgers himself. Then he claims that I don’t know how to grill. How can I get him to stop?

A: You have a father-in-law problem. See Hyphen, 8.3.1. —Timothy Gray

Patient Privacy

Posted by

0

Sometimes before I go to bed, I like to check in on one of my favorite YouTubers, Dr Pimple Popper (the nom de internet of dermatologist Sandra Lee), who posts videos of dermatologic procedures and skin care treatments. I particularly enjoy watching videos of dilated pore extractions, and I don’t mind watching lipoma extractions either (although I do sometimes fast-forward through the excisions). I know these types of videos can get viewers’ stomachs churning a bit, but I think it’s no worse than various photographs in medical journals I have worked at over the years. And because of my occupation, I do wonder about patient privacy and anonymity.

Patients featured on this YouTube channel may have a cyst near their eye or ask for blackheads to be removed from their cheek, and their faces are clearly visible. In many videos, Dr Lee chats with her patients, and although she sometimes edits out personal details, some of it stays. Dr Lee says that patients do sign consent forms before videos are published.

Similarly, when manuscript editors of medical journals encounter photographs of patients, we must review whether the photograph might intrude on patient privacy. Authors must obtain written permission from patients (or their legally authorized representatives) for any descriptions, photographs, or videos of patients or identifiable body parts and indicate that such consent was obtained in the Methods or Acknowledgment section. When I started in this field as an editorial assistant, I processed a manuscript that described a skin lesion on a patient’s back. In an accompanying photograph, the patient’s distinctive tattoo was visible, and I needed to ask the author to either obtain patient consent or have the photograph cropped because the patient (as well as anyone who knew he had that tattoo) would be able to identify himself. Results of imaging studies and photos of laboratory slides may also have identifying information that should be removed.

Protecting patient privacy also extends to what is in the text of an article. When editing case descriptions, case reports, and personal essays, nonessential identifying data (eg, sex, specific ages, race/ethnicity, occupation) should generally be removed unless the author has permission or the information is clinically or scientifically relevant and important. Authors and editors should not falsify or fictionalize details; doing so may introduce false or inaccurate data.

Read more about patient’s rights to privacy and anonymity in section 5.8.2 of the AMA Manual of Style.—Iris Y. Lo

Offensive Words and Apologetic Quotation Marks: Sorry Not Sorry

Posted by

1

News organizations everywhere had an important editorial decision to make in early January 2018 when President Trump categorized certain countries in a defamatory manner during a closed-door discussion about immigration in the Oval Office with Senators Dick Durbin and Lindsay Graham, among others.

  • “Trump decries immigrants from ‘shithole countries’ coming to US” (CNN headline)
  • “Trump derides protections for immigrants from ‘shithole’ countries” (Washington Post headline)
  • “‘Fox & Friends’ host called for Trump to clarify ‘s—hole’ comment shortly before denial” (The Hill headline)

In scientific reporting, as in politics and life, things sometimes get ugly, and when they do, we turn to apologetic quotation marks. In the examples above, the term shithole is a part of the story; without using the offensive term, the story’s meaning is lost. It’s interesting that these 3 examples apply the apologetic quotation marks in 3 different ways. The first example includes “countries” within the quotation marks, which is not necessary. The Washington Post example gets it right. And the example from The Hill is not fooling anyone. If you’re going to include it, include it. Crossing out a few letters in the offensive term is the literary equivalent to putting black bars over a patient’s eyes to make the patient “unidentifiable.” (←ironic use of apologetic quotation marks.) 

This is not a picture of my cat:

This is not an offensive word:

S—HOLE

You get the point.

The revised edition of the AMA Manual of Style will provide expanded guidance in the “Apologetic Quotation Marks” section of the Punctuation chapter, which currently only states that apologetic quotation marks are “sometimes used around words for special effect or to indicate irony.” Additional guidance will note that in some instances, the use of a potentially offensive term might be unavoidable if it is a direct quotation that is important to an article (eg, in a news story). In such cases, the offensive term may be published within quotation marks. The New York Times occasionally opens up its policy on including offensive terms in print. Ultimately, whether or not to include offensive language in an article is an editorial decision that comes down to how the term relates to the meaning of a story.—Lauren Fischer

   



Looking Forward to the 11th Edition

Posted by

2

At the most recent annual conference of the American Medical Writers Association, we received a sneak peek at some of the changes to come with the AMA Manual of Style 11th edition. AMA Manual of Style Committee Members Cheryl Iverson, Stacy Christiansen, and Annette Flanagin gave an overview of some highlights, including changes to the way references are styled, updates taking into account the growing presence of social media, and changes to nomenclature. Other topics included updates to corrections processes, clarification of authorship guidelines, and data sharing rules.

In this post, I thought I’d share some of the changes that I’m most excited about as an editor, many of which promise to make the editing process easier and more intuitive. Several new guidelines for styling references caught my attention. For example, electronic references in the current edition mirror traditional references with the addition of a URL in the middle of the reference and a date accessed at the end. The new edition will put URLs at the end of a reference, similar to how DOIs currently appear. Another welcome change is the omission of publisher locations from references to books and reports, which seems sensible given the multinational nature of publishing and the increasing move toward digital formats.

An update to the style of tables and figures was also covered in the presentation. Starting with the 11th edition, column heads in tables and axis labels in graphs will appear in sentence case capitalization rather than title case. Table and figure headings and labels in scientific publishing often contain a great deal of text, making it all the more important to display that text in a way that’s as easy as possible for readers to parse. In addition to saving space, the use of sentence case capitalization throughout figures and tables will make these elements appear more standardized and easier to read.

The new edition also makes some helpful distinctions between AMA style preference and alternatives considered acceptable. For example, it is now acceptable to use of “they” as a singular pronoun. In addition to circumstances in which “they” is a person’s preferred pronoun, this construction can also be helpful in preserving patient confidentiality (eg, avoiding the disclosure of patients’ sex in a small sample size to preserve anonymity).

Many other exciting changes are anticipated with the upcoming 11th edition. Stay tuned for more!—Heather Green

 

 

Words for the Road

Posted by

0

Maybe, like me, you’ve got a lengthy commute to work, either by train or by car. Maybe, also like me, you’ll be road tripping for the holidays and need a way to pass the time. So probably (wait for it…like me!), you are already filling your phone with podcasts in preparation.

Among your daily news briefs, true-crime series, and Stuff You Should Know, consider adding these grammar and language podcasts if you want to brush up on your word nerdiness while you’re on the go.

Grammar Girl: It’s a top podcast among editors and writers, and one you probably already subscribe to. Mignon Fogarty has been bringing Quick and Dirty Tips on grammar and usage to the masses for more than a decade in the form of her website, books, and podcast. With more than 600 podcasts (!) in her library, even if you’ve heard them all, there’s always a topic you can revisit.

Lexicon Valley: This podcast from Slate has also been around for a number of years, and its current host, linguist John McWhorter, explores grammar, of course, but also topics such as etymology and dialect. I particularly like his take on subjects because he frames them in historical context, mixes in relevance to current social issues, and recognizes that, like society, the English language is ever changing.

The World in Words: Packaged in the familiar part reporting, part storytelling format of many popular public radio programs, this podcast from Public Radio International tells stories of language of all types and how it affects those who use it. You’ll hear a wide variety of intriguing topics, including bilingualism, rhetoric in politics, and even how animals communicate.

Bonus audiobook:

Word by Word: The Secret Life of Dictionaries: If you’ve ever obsessed over the meaning and definition behind words, you’ll probably see bits of yourself in Kory Stamper’s book about her life as lexicographer. Plus, you’ll get a peek behind the doors at Merriam-Webster and find out just how words and their definitions make it to the page.

What language podcasts or audiobooks keep you both entertained and informed on long trips?—Jamie Scott

Transitions of Note, As Such

Posted by

1

I come to praise the lowly transition, the chemical drain opener of scientific writing. A transition unclogs copy. Just pour it in and it works.

In our daily responsibilities, time does not always allow for an examination of language functionality at that level of detail.  More pressing concerns prevail.

In processing a manuscript into final article form for JAMA Network journals, an editor applies several rounds of detailed attention to the information. The process involves many musts. The title must not be declarative or give away the conclusion. The abstract must be complete. The type of study must be specified. The results section must include appropriate data. The methods section must identify ethical or institutional review board approval or waiver as well as informed patient consent. The statistical analysis section must specify the statistical tests used and not present P values alone without comparative data. Figure and table elements must be complete. Abbreviations must be tracked for consistent use. The discussion must include a paragraph about the limitations of the study type. The conclusions must not be overstated or absolute.

Along with including these musts, the copy must follow JAMA Network style conventions, from the picayune (no period after “vs”) to the consequential (wording presents patient first: patients with diabetes instead of diabetics). The end matter also has to follow the author contribution, conflicts of interest disclosures, and identification of funding requirements.

The introduction, methods, results, and discussion format for scientific articles lead readers from section to section. Within those sections, subheads guide readers from one major topic to another.

What about finer divisions of thought than can be accommodated by subheads? In the dash to process 3000 words according to scientific format and AMA style directives, something often gets lost in the shuffle: the utility of the transitions used to move the reader within and between paragraphs of a subsection. One could argue that if transitions go unnoticed then they have done their job. Readers have gone from point A to point B, and no one has gotten hurt.

There is no must for transitions, but the AMA Manual of Style lists 6 functions of a transition with standard examples that perform those functions.

When I review a proof after the list of musts has been confirmed, I am sometimes startled that a conjunction or transition at the paragraph level appears several times in rapid succession. Three uses of of note occur at the end of the discussion section. Four occurrences of as such appear as an opening phrase. Even that being said has slipped by although no one is actually talking. A couple of buts might more properly be ands. Suddenly I am surrounded by however, furthermore, in addition or additionally, and therefore. A little CTRL + 4 action shows 7 however, 4 furthermore, and a walloping 9 additionally uses all within a 9-page original investigation.

Gliding across all-purpose transitions is quite easy as one goes about identifying and focusing on the musts. An all-purpose transition works because it is a transition regardless of whether it functions specifically.  When faced with rapid-succession infelicities, I strike them, perhaps keeping the first. Items of note are apparent from their inclusion. As such in most cases has no actual antecedent. A congenial and from a misbegotten but adds to readability. A quick note to the author usually begets a response ranging from “ok thanks” to something a little more effusive but not overboard.

We have become accustomed to reading right past transitions perhaps because we are not striving for literary awards. No one throws a parade to celebrate a sentence whose dispatched as such has hit the bricks.

Why note how transitions are used? I’m not advocating parades, which would eat significant processing time. Accurate transition use is part of a standard of completeness. Every movement toward specificity is worthwhile to give readers a clearer view of the author’s point. With this in mind, every transition, as such, is of note.—Timothy Gray

What’s the Magic Word?

Posted by

0

At the beginning of this year, I had the opportunity to escape the slowing thawing tundra of Chicago to attend the 2018 Council of Science Editors Annual Meeting in sunny, Spanish moss–scented New Orleans. In between trips on the streetcar (where I resisted yelling “STELLA!!!” out the window at French Quarter passersby) and consuming half of the Western Hemisphere’s stock of powdered sugar on a plate of beignets, I—along with several women from JAMA Network (#squadgoals)—took in panels on several pressing topics in the scientific publishing community, such preprint servers, image manipulation, diversity in publication staffing, social media, and data sharing.

One of the most highly anticipated discussions was the last panel on the last day, and although conference fatigue was beginning to set in, we sipped our Diet Cokes with determination to soldier through and gain insight from “The Copy Editor–Author Relationship: A Delicate Balance.”

The panel was led by Peter Olson, Senior Copyediting Coordinator at Sheridan Press, and Jessica LaPointe, Managing Copy Editor at the American Meteorological Society. Mr Olson was the first to present and spoke on the “Anatomy of an Author Query.” He highlighted the symbiotic relationship between copy editors and authors and the various challenges that are involved in the editorial process, including tight deadlines, busy schedules, the differing interpretation of editing comments, and the need to convey complex concepts in a way that maximizes the author’s experience and answers the questions of what, when, and why. He offered 4 central tenets for copy and manuscript editors to follow when querying authors:

  1. Be clear. When queries are unclear it can confuse and/or annoy the author, and you may get an equally unclear response. You can’t assume that the author has a perspective on the comment’s meaning or on the ins and outs of your publication’s editorial process or style guide. Instead of simply asking if edits are okay, provide a brief rationale for the change being suggested and indicate if something is a journal/style requirement. When asking the author to clarify something in the text, articulate what is unclear and, if possible, suggest an edit.
  2. Be concise. If your queries are concisely worded then it saves the author time in reading and understanding them, which can make them happier with the editorial process in general. Try to imagine the author’s perspective when creating queries and consider consolidating comments into 1 query (eg, “Please approve all edits in the sentence beginning…” or “Please provide corresponding data for all P values in this paragraph”). Formulating and using standardized queries for comments that you find yourself frequently making in manuscripts can also help save time for you and the author.
  3. Be accurate. Make sure that the way you have phrased your query reflects the edits that need to be made. Although there are no doubt highly trained PhDs and statisticians among us, many manuscript editors (present company included) do not come from a scientific background, and on occasion it may be appropriate to indicate that you are unclear of the subject matter of the sentence. For example, it is better to point out a perceived inconsistency than to just make a change in cases in which the same abbreviation is used to mean 2 different things, or if a sentence has multiple subjects and it unclear to which one data are referring.
  4. Be professional. Avoid language that is informal, flippant, curt, contentious, critical, or hostile, as well as casual abbreviations and exclamation points. Instead of making an open-ended comment like “Can we be more specific here?” specify what needs to be explained. Comments like “This reference needs to be sourced” provide a directive but are not helpful in indicating what information is needed. With authors you sometimes get more with sugar than with spice, so please be sure to actually use the word please and ask them for the exact thing that you need for them to do. As my mother used to say when I pleaded for a Fruit Roll-Up or the chance to watch Bill Nye the Science Guy, “What’s the magic word?”

Ms LaPointe was up next with her presentation on “Maintaining the Delicate Balance.” She stressed the importance of using a light touch to balance editing for clarity with changing meaning and taking your time during editing to potentially lessen the number of queries you need to make. Additionally, she focused on how to work successfully with international authors and presented a series of myths on the challenges that dynamic presents:

Myth 1: Papers from Asia present particular challenges. These authors actually usually write very clearly, utilize effective editing services before submitting articles, and consult with English-speaking colleagues extensively during the writing process.

Myth 2: An extensive English-language education eliminates problems. Authors who are very familiar with English, such as European authors, may have more confidence in than ability with the language and may be reluctant to use US English.

Myth 3: Copy editors prefer editing for English speakers. I think that we can all attest that courteous, cooperative authors are the best authors, no matter where they come from!

Ms LaPointe finished her presentation with a reminder that frankly, English is hard (even for native speakers!), and pointed out some common errors to look for when working with international authors, including preposition confusion (on words such as associated, accompanied, based, center, dissimilar, identical, off, and trade), plural vs singular, disconnected sentences, word choice, the confusion of “eg” and “ie,” and the incorrect use of “et al.”

We all know that maintaining the delicate balance between applying style rules and accommodating author satisfaction can sometimes feel like being stuck in a hamster wheel, but hopefully some of these tips will prove helpful for your editorial process and professional interactions. Just remember the magic word, and if all else fails (and you don’t happen to work on a cardiology publication), you can always treat yourself to the best cure-all for all author woes—a heaping plate of beignets piled with powdered sugar.—Amanda Ehrhardt

What’s in a (Drug) Name?

Posted by

0

I’ve recently joined the JAMA Network after a brief career in pharmaceutical editing, where I’ve read everything from the easy-to-digest pamphlets that come with your prescription to the headache-inducing instructions chemists follow when testing that a drug meets its quality compliance requirements.

One of these jobs required the terrifying task that editors, after editing an assignment, would sit together and read aloud entire monographs and articles to confirm all changes.

Real talk: I love editing because I get to read alone all day. I avoid public speaking whenever possible. Mustering the courage to read aloud in front of other people for hours on end—let alone pronounce words I’d never seen before—really revved the ol’ anxiety engine.

After countless sessions of tripping over impossible-to-say generic (or nonproprietary) drug names, I finally decided to do some research on my multisyllabic angst inducers.

Enter the United States Adopted Names (USAN) Council, a team composed of representatives from the American Medical Association, the United States Pharmacopeia, and the American Pharmacists Association, as well as a US Food and Drug Administration liaison and 1 member-at-large. This team “is responsible for selecting simple, informative, and unique nonproprietary (generic) drug names,” according to its website.

“Simple,” they say?

But, in fact, the names are not as daunting as I once thought and are often broken down into a general pattern. Again, from the USAN Council website:

Prefix: Means nothing; differentiates drug from others in class

(See? Nothing to be scared of here.)

Infix: Used occasionally; further subclassifies

Stem: Indicates place in nomenclature scheme; drugs with the same stem are related

(The stem is considered the pharmacologic family name and can be broken into further subgroups.)

 An example:

Cobimetinib

Prefix: co-

Infix: -bi-

Stem: -tinib (meaning: tyrosine kinase inhibitors [anticancer drug])

Stem subgroup: -metinib (meaning: MEK inhibitor [anticancer drug specifically to treat melanoma])

It also helps that the USAN Council strives to place any new drug into already existing families, so once you’ve seen several drugs in that family, pronouncing their siblings should be a breeze.

Next up for me: Conquering my Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary. Wish me luck!—Jamie Scott

 

 

Pop Quiz, Hotshot

Posted by

3

What’s the most important quality to have as a manuscript editor?

A few obvious traits come to mind, like attention to detail and command of the language and style.

When I was hired a few years ago, I wasn’t worried about developing those skills because I figured they would all get better with time and experience. My biggest worry—and what I thought was the most important quality—was speed.

I had 2 types of speed in mind. I wasn’t as worried about speed of editing for style because I knew I just needed to keep working with the style guide. After enough repetitions, of course I wouldn’t need to refer to the book as frequently, and the recognition of a style point would become recall of the answer.

No, I was most anxious about speed of reading. Obviously, reading comprehension was the key, but I even Googled how to strengthen eye muscles to prevent fatigue. Manuscript editing is sort of professional reading, so I thought the best editors should be the best readers.

I don’t know when exactly my anxiety went away. I don’t think it was just the repeated advice from my manager and coworkers—I heard that for months without it truly sinking in. But eventually, I stopped thinking about it, started focusing on other aspects to improve, and fell into a steady editing pace.

The change in thinking has been good for my sanity, but I’m not convinced my original idea is entirely wrong. Reading speed isn’t as important for me as I once feared, but I still wonder where speed ranks in the list of necessary qualities for an editor.

Freelancers, proofreaders, and managers: how important is reading speed in your job? Leave us a comment!—Kevin Brown