AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors
AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors Books
Product Description
For decades obligatory, the AMA Manual of Style continues to provide editorial support to the medical and scientific publishing community. Since the 1998 publication of the 9th edition, but, the world of medical publishing has rapidly modernized, and the intersection of research and publishing has become ever more complex. The 10th edition of the AMA Manual of Style, published in early 2007, brings this definitive manual into the 21st century with a broadened international perspective.
In doing so, the 10th edition has expanded its electronic guidelines, with the understanding that authors now routinely submit articles through online systems and often cite Web-only content. Ethical and legal issues receive increased attention, with detailed guidelines on authorship, conflicts of interest, scientific misconduct, intellectual property, and the protection of individuals’ rights in scientific research and publication. The new edition examines research ethics and editorial independence and features new material on indexing and searching as well as medical nomenclature.
JAMA and the Archives Journals, one of the most respected groups of medical publications in the world, have lent members of their expert staff of professional journal editors to the group that has produced this edition. Extensively peer-reviewed, the 10th edition provides a welcome and improved standard for the growing international medical community. More than a style manual, this 10th edition offers invaluable guidance on how to navigate the dilemmas that authors and researchers and their institutions, medical editors and publishers, and members of the news media who cover scientific research confront in a society that has thrust these issues focal top stage. ALso available in an online version!
Buy Cheap AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors Online
Related posts:
- The Manual of Scientific Style: A Guide for Authors, Editors, and Researchers
- Scientific Style and Format: The CBE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers
- Quantities, Symbols, Units, and Abbreviations in the Life Sciences: A Guide for Authors and Editors
- Units, Symbols and Abbreviations: A Guide for Authors and Editors in Medicine and Related Sciences
- How to Report Statistics in Medicine: Annotated Guidelines for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers
The book was listed as used, but it was like a new book. I am very pleased with the book and the low price that I paid.
Rating: 5 / 5
I ordered this book because it is a text required by my Professor (ODU). It is just so what I sought after and is in fantastic (new) shape up.
Rating: 5 / 5
A must for any science novelist. This book is concise and has helpful in rank.
Rating: 5 / 5
I’ve been coming up for this book since apt a medical editor 3 years ago. It is absolutely updated for modern-day medical communications and now includes extensive sections with Internet-correlated in rank. I use it near every day and absolutely like it.
Rating: 5 / 5
The opening pages of the new style manual illustrate a serious problem with medical writing style. This sentence, for example, “Preparation of a scholarly manuscript requires thoughtful consideration of the topic and anticipation of the reader’s needs and questions”, is typical of the stuffy, pretentious, and dead style in which medical articles are ordinarily written. What is incorrect with the sentence, you question? Nothing grammatical. But the first two words signal the ponderous style used in most academic and scientific writing. “Preparation” is a noun that should be a verbal: “Preparing”. “Preparation of” indicates a long and ponderous noun phrase that contains a head noun plus an unnecessary prepositional phrase: “of a scholarly manuscript”. To make the sentence parallel, the author adds two more of those bloated long and ponderous noun phrases that control a head noun plus an unnecessary prepositional phrase: “thoughtful consideration of the topic” and “anticipation of the reader’s needs and questions”. What’s incorrect with saying it this way: “Preparing a scholarly manuscript requires thoughtfully considering the topic and anticipating the reader’s needs and questions”? The original sentence is 19 words; the revised is 16 words. That reduces the word count by 15%. In a volume of 1032 pages, that means at least 1000 fewer words to read just by eliminating one verbose structure. Scientific and academic writing contains so many verbose structures that a excellent editor would probably be able to eliminate between 5000-8000 words in 1000 pages of text without altering the soporific third person impersonal passive style that the JAMA and Archives run editors use. To really make the book fascinating to read — and as a medical editor for the past dozen years, I have to say that I find it helpful but dull — would require a rewrite using active verbs and a much more direct and private style. The authors might have said “When writing your scholarly article, reckon deeply about the topic and anticipate your reader’s needs and questions”. That’s 17 words, only a 10% reduction. Still, it directly addresses the reader because it uses “your”. Readers generally prefer to be talked *to* rather than talked *at*: it’s more private. I judge, but, that the first admonition, “reckon deeply about the topic”, is superfluous. Anticipating the reader’s needs and questions requires the author to reckon deeply about the topic. That eliminates another 6 words: “When writing your scholarly article, anticipate your reader’s needs and questions”. That’s a mere 11 words, a 42% reduction. Someone said that brevity is the soul of wit. Whoever it was was aptly.
With medical journal editors who seem to judge that the words in scholarly manuscripts should act on readers as sodium thiopental and its siblings act on patients below the knife, it’s no wonder that scholarly manuscripts continue to be soporific. It isn’t necessary for scientific articles to sound like dirges when they’re read. But ancient habits die hard, don’t they?
Rating: 3 / 5