Medical Editorial Journalism in the Modern ERA: Beyond the Acceptance and Rejection

Abstract

Medical Editorial Journalism (MEJ) is commonly viewed as a process of disseminating medical knowledge to the general population. In contrast, medical writing is a far more diverse and challenging domain within the sciences. The medical editor stands at the crossroads of science, medical updates and interaction, ethics, decision-making, and the public's trust. The editor is not simply the individual who approves or denies submissions, but helps to decide which evidence deserves attention, how that proof should be conveyed and how the credibility of scientific papers should be maintained. With a rising number of medical articles, the position of the editor becomes more crucial. Scientific editors must be able to appraise papers critically, understand research methods, assess the quality of the evidence, interact with scholarly authors and peers, and reach fair and timely decisions. These skills show that scholarly work and its evaluation require more than academic position or expertise as a researcher. This raises an essential concern. Who guides the medical editor? Much of the standard training of editors has been based upon experiential, mentoring, and specific training. Practical experience is still useful, but it is not a substitute for formal professional training. Evidence suggests that editors benefit from training of authorship, conflicts of interest, peer evaluation, and plagiarism, as well as prior editorial experience. This insight should motivate scholarly journals, professional associations, organizations and institutions to think of regular learning of editors not as an optional pursuit but as a vital element for scientific excellence.