Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
In addition to clinical trials it is likely that other publicly funded medical research is going unpublished. Clearly, there are many factors behind the issue and I would like to offer one for consideration. On the whole, research is conducted by research fellows and PhD students almost exclusively employed (or studying) on fixed term contracts. In other words, they have temporary posts. Whilst it may be possible to publish within the contract it is not always achieved and therefore the person who knows most about the research moves on, prior to publication. The professors and consultants who won funding are not always hands-on in the project and even if they are, their schedules do not permit extra writing time.
The nature of the employment means that research fellows are constantly seeking their next position, usually whilst applying for funding to remain where they are. Thus, they are acutely aware of the fragility of their continued income. With a starting salary in the region of £30k (if they have a PhD) they are not in a position to put aside adequate funds for possible gaps in employment. Promises of the possibility of continued employment does not constitute job security. The risk of unemployment may lead to them leaving prior to the end of a fixed term contract just to ensure survival. Once again, the employee is lost before the research is published. When the researcher leaves their focus must be on the next post and new employers are not likely to give time for writing-up prior research. This situation is unsatisfactory for all stakeholders.
One solution may be to increase the number of permanent research contracts. With job security it is less likely fellows will leave prior to publication. Alternatively, allocate the task of the initial draft to a permanent employee. The temporary employment factor is just one of many hindering publication but if we share best practice for retaining fellows until after publication it may contribute to more projects being published.
DISCLAIMER: Views expressed here are my personal views and do not reflect views of any of my employers or any other organisations.
Competing interests:
No competing interests
31 October 2018
Lynn N Lansbury
Academic
University of Portsmouth
University House Winston Churchill Avenue Portsmouth Hampshire PO1 2UP
Re: “Shocking” number of clinical trials are never reported, say MPs
In addition to clinical trials it is likely that other publicly funded medical research is going unpublished. Clearly, there are many factors behind the issue and I would like to offer one for consideration. On the whole, research is conducted by research fellows and PhD students almost exclusively employed (or studying) on fixed term contracts. In other words, they have temporary posts. Whilst it may be possible to publish within the contract it is not always achieved and therefore the person who knows most about the research moves on, prior to publication. The professors and consultants who won funding are not always hands-on in the project and even if they are, their schedules do not permit extra writing time.
The nature of the employment means that research fellows are constantly seeking their next position, usually whilst applying for funding to remain where they are. Thus, they are acutely aware of the fragility of their continued income. With a starting salary in the region of £30k (if they have a PhD) they are not in a position to put aside adequate funds for possible gaps in employment. Promises of the possibility of continued employment does not constitute job security. The risk of unemployment may lead to them leaving prior to the end of a fixed term contract just to ensure survival. Once again, the employee is lost before the research is published. When the researcher leaves their focus must be on the next post and new employers are not likely to give time for writing-up prior research. This situation is unsatisfactory for all stakeholders.
One solution may be to increase the number of permanent research contracts. With job security it is less likely fellows will leave prior to publication. Alternatively, allocate the task of the initial draft to a permanent employee. The temporary employment factor is just one of many hindering publication but if we share best practice for retaining fellows until after publication it may contribute to more projects being published.
DISCLAIMER: Views expressed here are my personal views and do not reflect views of any of my employers or any other organisations.
Competing interests: No competing interests