Open Access
Editorial
| Issue |
SICOT-J
Volume 7, 2021
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Article Number | E1 | |
| Number of page(s) | 4 | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021042 | |
| Published online | 16 August 2021 | |
- Taylor RB (2012) The joys of outlining in medical writing. The European Medical Writers Association 21(3), 205–208. [Google Scholar]
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Updated October 2008. http://www.icmje.org. [Google Scholar]
- Mavrogenis AF, Panagopoulos GN, Megaloikonomos PD, Panagopoulos VN, Mauffrey C, Quaile A, Scarlat MM (2018) Scientific misconduct (fraud) in medical writing. Orthopedics 41(2), e176–e183. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brand RA (2008) Writing for clinical orthopaedics and related research. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(1), 239–247. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brand RA (2003) Writing for clinical orthopaedics and related research. Clin Orthop Relat Res 413, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Zazgyva A, Kon E, Mauffrey C, Mavrogenis AF, Scarlat MM (2017) Reviews, reviewers and reviewing. Int Orthop 41(1), 1–2. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brand RA (2012) Further thoughts on authorship: gift authorship. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(10), 2926–2929. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Scarlat MM, Mavrogenis AF, Pećina M, Niculescu M (2015) Impact and alternative metrics for medical publishing: our experience with International Orthopaedics. Int Orthop 39(8), 1459–1464. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Taylor RB (2005) The clinician’s guide to medical writing, 1st edn. New York: Springer-Verlag. [Google Scholar]
- Mavrogenis AF, Quaile A, Scarlat MM (2016) Attractive papers and accurate English. Int Orthop 40(4), 649–651. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Caton J, Said HG (2015) SICOT-J: Why another orthopaedic open access journal? SICOT J 1, 1. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mavrogenis AF, Quaile A, Scarlat MM (2020) Classic publications and scientometrics in orthopaedics. Int Orthop 44(12), 2477–2480. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Quaile A, Mavrogenis A, Scarlat M (2021) Managing patients’ expectations in orthopaedics. Int Orthop 45(3), 539–541. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mavrogenis AF, Pećina M, Chen W, Scarlat MM (2020) Useful and useless publications measured by bibliometrics and scientometrics in orthopaedic surgery. Are the relevance of a journal and publication metrics useful enough for the scientific promotion of surgeons? Int Orthop 44(10), 1875–1879. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mavrogenis AF, Quaile A, Scarlat MM (2020) The good, the bad and the rude peer-review. Int Orthop 44(3), 413–415. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Caton JH, Ferreira A (2017) Dual mobility cup: A new French revolution (Editorial). Int Orthop 41(3), 433–437. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Batailler C, Caton J, Lustig S (2020) Global perspective of innovation in hip and knee replacement in 2020. SICOT J 6, E1. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.