The Ethics Writings of Roger A. Brumback, MD

Roger A. Brumback, MD (1953-2013), a renaissance man, shared with the world his knowledge and opinions on many subjects. Thus, it should come as no surprise that ethics did not escape Dr Brumback's consideration. Reading Dr Brumback's vitae, I came across several publications that afford insights into topics that tugged at his moral fabric. Dr Brumback was a steadfast defender of the scientific method. Reading his commentaries, one gets the sense that Dr Brumback felt personally attacked when quackery challenged science. In addition, and as long-time Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Child Neurology, Dr Brumback considered it a personal affront every time a paper he published, or for that matter published by any scientific journal, had to be retracted or corrected. In the following paragraphs, I review a selection of Dr Brumback's ethics writings.

"3 . . 2 . . 1 . . Impact [factor]: target [academic career] destroyed!": just another statistical casualty

"Publish or perish" is the time-honored "principle" for academicians who race to accumulate lines under the "publications" section of a curriculum vitae. The original intent of publication-to inform others of findings and further scientific knowledge-has been corrupted by factors including (1) exponential growth of journals and the journal industry, fueled in part by intrusion of the Internet into all aspects of academic life; and (2) adoption of journal metrics (rather than written content) as the measure of scientific quality. The proprietary Thomson Reuters Impact Factor is the most pernicious metric, having caused editors and publishers to change editorial practices to boost the number. At the same time, gullible administrators and government agencies have been persuaded that metrics for the journal in which materials are published can be used as a measure of the worth of individual investigators (and institutions) and their research efforts: simple numbers can be substituted for the burdensome effort required to read and assess research quality. Thus, granting of research funds, awarding of academic rank and tenure, and determination of salaries (including bonus payments) have become tied to manipulable journal metrics rather than the significance or quality of reported research. Therefore, it is no wonder that the integrity of science is more often being questioned. How should a young investigator approach the "publish or perish" dilemma? Performing sound research and preparing optimal materials for publication must remain the overriding goals: properly articulate the question addressed by the study; thoroughly document all methods and case information; carefully describe results including any conflicting or negative findings; discuss the importance of the findings along with how the results address the initial question and whether findings refute or confirm previous studies; prepare properly cited bibliographic references; list all author contributions, potential conflicts of interest, financial support, and required ethical approvals; and provide a catchy title and an abstract containing sufficient information that other investigators perusing scientific indices will be enticed to read the published article. Submit the completed manuscript to the most appropriate journal based on that journal's previously published content and relevance to the field of study regardless of journal metrics. On publication, notify investigators in the same field to ask for their comments on the work. Thus, an individual will become known for the quality of his or her work product and the worshiping of publication metrics will be unnecessary.