Skip to Content

Posts tagged with "The Scientific Literature"

  • Graduate School

  • The Scientific Literature

    Now, That’s An Abstract

    A reader who’s attending the International Congress on Heterocyclic Chemistry in Glasgow later this year sent me a note about it. Like many such meetings, they have guidelines for presentation and poster abstracts. But this one was done by someone who’s been around the block a few times. The sample abstract is from a team… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    What The Referees Really Think

    I wish that more journals did this! Environmental Microbiology, which I have never looked at before, has published its favorite reviewer comments from the year just passed. They’re not tied to the papers that generated them, naturally, but then, many of these manuscripts didn’t quite make the cut: “The biggest problem with this ma… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    Retractions: Why The Secrecy?

    Ben Goldacre has an excellent point here at Bad Science: when a paper gets retracted from a journal, shouldn’t everyone know why it’s been retracted? He highlights the experience of the blog Retraction Watch (which I hadn’t heard of until now), when they tried to find out why a paper had been pulled from the… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    The Life of a Paper

    Angewandte Chemie recently ran a behind-the-scenes article about their journal, with several interesting bits of information. For one thing, they’ve gotten a lot more selective over the years, as the number of submissions has gone up. They publish many more papers, total, than they used to, but reject a much higher fraction at the same… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    Putting Some Numbers on Peer Review

    Since we’ve been talking about peer review on and off around here, this paper in PLoS One is timely. The authors are putting some numbers on a problem that journal editors have long had to deal with: widely varying reviews from different referees for the same exact paper. It’s a meta-analysis of 52 studies of… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    What A Paper Doesn’t Have In It

    So, should I apologize for the tone of yesterday’s post? I’m not ready to yet, and I’ll explain why. Here’s a general rule: if you find yourself having to make excuses for a scientific paper, for the key experiments that weren’t done and the rationales that don’t appear, then something is wrong. A paper shouldn&# Read More
  • Infectious Diseases

    Chiral What? Chiral How?

    Thanks to an email from a reader, I can bring you this very weird paper from Tetrahedron. The authors claim to have extracted a local plant and isolated nevirapine, (sold as Viramune by Boehringer Ingleheim as a reverse transcriptase inhibitor for HIV). That’s kind of odd. I’m no natural products expert, but I’ve sure seen… Read More
  • Chemical News

    The Solid Phase

    Looking over the chemical literature with an RSS reader can really give you a sense of what the hot topics are, and what’s cooling off. Remember when it seemed as if every third paper was about ionic liquids? You still see work in the area, but it’s nowhere near as crazy as it was. (I… Read More
  • The Scientific Literature

    So What’s Going On With Peer Review, Anyway?

    I have a larger comment, sparked by the controversy over the NASA-arsenic-bacteria paper in Science. But it’s not just about that one. It’s about the “reactome” paper (also in Science and now retracted), the hexacyclinol synthesis published in Ang. Chem., and others. There have been, I think it’s fair to say, a number… Read More