posted Jun 25, 2009 12:12 PM by Nicole Pagowsky
posted Jun 16, 2009 2:52 PM by Nicole Pagowsky
Some questions to consider when asking for reference help. If you are able to answer these questions for yourself and for us, we will be better able to help you:
- What is your research topic?
- What are you looking for?
- Where have you searched?
- What have you already tried (what search strategy did you use)?
- What have you already found that is useful (if anything)?
|
posted Jun 10, 2009 1:58 PM by Nicole Pagowsky
As you are discussing in class, it is very important to be sure of the authenticity of your sources. Recently, it was discovered that Elsevier, science journal publishing giant, published at least six "fake" journals as directed by Merck, to serve as marketing tools for pharmaceutical drugs, yet to appear as scholarly, peer-reviewed journals.See what Slashdot has to say:
Hugh Pickens writes "Don't
believe everything you read on the internet is a good rule to follow,
but it turns out that you can't even believe a 'peer reviewed
scientific journal' as details emerge that drug manufacturer Merck created a phony, but real sounding, peer-review journal
titled the 'Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine' to publish
data favorable to its products. 'What's sad is that I'm sure many a
primary care physician was given literature from Merck that said, "As
published in Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, Fosamax
outperforms all other medications...."' writes Summer Johnson in a post
on the website of the American Journal of Bioethics. One Australian
rheumatologist named Peter Brooks who served as an 'honorary advisory
board' to the journal didn't receive a single paper for peer-review in
his entire time on the board, but it didn't bother him because he
apparently knew the journal did not receive original submissions of
research. All this is probably not too surprising in light of Merck's
difficulties with Vioxx, the once $2.5 billion a year drug that was
pulled from the market in September 2004, after a study showed it
doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in long-term users
resulting in payments by Merck of $4.85 billion to settle personal injury claims
from former users, but it bears repeating that 'if physicians would not
lend their names or pens to these efforts, and publishers would not
offer their presses, these publications could not exist.'"
If you are interested, here is some more on the topic:The Danger of Drugs... and Data (The Guardian)Merck Published Fake Journal (The Scientist)
|
|
