Posted November 10, 2018 06:29:10 The medical profession has been a target of online attacks over the past year, and its critics are not letting up.
The Journal of Medical Ethics, which is published by the American Medical Association, has recently received a barrage of criticism from academics, politicians and other concerned citizens.
In the wake of the election, a number of medical groups, including the American Association of Medical Colleges and the American Society of Hematology-Oncology, published open letters to the editor defending the medical profession, and calling for greater accountability from journals.
But a growing number of journals are being forced to step up and step back from controversial articles and editorial decisions, said Dr. Sarah Bowers, executive director of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which has an association with the Journal of American Medical Education.
“The AMA and its member medical societies have not been immune,” she said.
The APA, which represents over 1,000 medical associations, has launched a review of its ethics code, to be conducted by an independent consultant in the spring. “
That’s what I would call a new standard,” Bowers said.
The APA, which represents over 1,000 medical associations, has launched a review of its ethics code, to be conducted by an independent consultant in the spring.
The group said it has already begun an internal review of articles in its medical journals that it believes were misleading, misleading or otherwise inappropriate.
The AMA said in a statement that it will be addressing its ethics standards, including a new policy that requires all authors of an article or editorial to provide their name and affiliation, and the date the article or article appeared in the journal.
“This review will examine articles that have received a substantial number of positive comments from the AMA, including articles about pediatricians and other physicians who treat pediatric patients,” AMA President Nancy O’Connor said in the statement.
The AMA has also launched a program to identify articles that are misleading, in line with the American Bar Association’s statement that “disclosures of personal financial information are not required.” “
And this review will look for violations of ethical standards that are inconsistent with the standards and the public interest that the AMA is committed to.”
The AMA has also launched a program to identify articles that are misleading, in line with the American Bar Association’s statement that “disclosures of personal financial information are not required.”
The association said in its statement that its board will examine the APA’s ethics code and publish recommendations.
“While we are aware that the current process is not yet in place, we believe that the process should be reviewed,” said Drs.
Andrew Kolodny, a board member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and Paul Sussman, a member of APA board.
The two have both been vocal in their criticism of the journal, which they believe has been publishing articles that misrepresent the medical community.
“I’ve heard about one or two examples of a journal that has been doing a whole lot of bad journalism and it’s only been the APACs fault,” Sussmann said.
He added that APA has already taken steps to increase its oversight of the editorial process.
“It’s just one of the things we have to look at,” he said.
Bowers of the APAs Association of Pediatrics and Hematologic Society, a parent group, said in an email that the review was important, but noted that the organization has not yet determined whether it will take action against an article.
“If it’s really a concern, it could take a little bit longer than we’ve been waiting to do,” Bower said.
One of the more controversial articles that Bowers and other medical groups have been criticized for, the one about a pediatrician who tested positive for Lyme disease, was published in the Journal Of Clinical Investigation in February 2018.
In that article, the author, Dr. Thomas Niederhauser, a pediatric infectious disease specialist in the U.S., made the case that the condition is rare, and that Lyme disease is not associated with increased risk of death and disability.
“Lonely fever is a rare disease, and most cases of Lyme disease do not show any sign of increasing severity over time,” he wrote.
“Nor does the number of symptoms show any indication of an increased risk.”
The journal editor, Drs John R. Gaskins and David W. Dixson, both of the University of Michigan Medical School, said at the time that they did not find evidence of increased risk for Lyme and that the article had been peer reviewed.
They said that if the paper had been retracted or published elsewhere, “we would have made the same decision” about whether to remove the article from the journal and publish a correction.
The journal also retracted the article in March 2019 after an investigation by the journal’s editor and several authors.
“Given the seriousness of the finding, we decided to retract the article because we have no data to support the claim,” the authors wrote.
The article has since been retracted.