Rest is essential for effective therapies, and so it is for preparing a manuscript

Numerous medical articles are commented upon. This suggests that their scientific quality is insufficient. This need not be the case, however: most comments regard the presentation of the data, the conclusions or lacking information in the discussion. Such flaws can commonly be attributed to either...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Olaf R. van Loon, A.J. (Tom) van Loon
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2023-03-01
Series:Complementary Therapies in Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965229923000080
Description
Summary:Numerous medical articles are commented upon. This suggests that their scientific quality is insufficient. This need not be the case, however: most comments regard the presentation of the data, the conclusions or lacking information in the discussion. Such flaws can commonly be attributed to either too much haste in writing the manuscript, or insufficient time between finishing the manuscript and submission; this last problem seems the most common cause, as it deprives the author from reading his own text critically and with an open mind. The solution for this problem is simple: after having finished a manuscript, it should be laid aside for at least a week, after which the author should read it with the eyes of a reader, not the eyes of an author. Critical, open-minded reading after rest helps increase the quality of the resulting manuscript, just like rest helps a patient during most therapies.
ISSN:0965-2299