Quality of scientific articles

The paper discusses the difficulties in judging the quality of scientific manuscripts and describes some common pitfalls that should be avoided when preparing a paper for submission to a peer-reviewed journal. Peer review is an imperfect system, with less than optimal reliability and uncertain validity. However, as it is likely that it will remain as the principal process of screening papers for publication, authors should avoid some common mistakes when preparing a report based on empirical findings of human research. Among these are: excessively long abstracts, extensive use of abbreviations, failure to report results of parsimonious data analyses, and misinterpretation of statistical associations identified in observational studies as causal. Another common problem in many manuscripts is their excessive length, which makes them more difficult to be evaluated or read by the intended readers, if published. The evaluation of papers after their publication with a view towards their inclusion in a systematic review is also discussed. The limitations of the impact factor as a criterion to judge the quality of a paper are reviewed.

Química Nova Interativa - QNInt - o portal do conhecimento da SBQ: conectando ciência e educação

The Química Nova Interativa (QNInt) portal was launched in 2009 by the Brazilian Chemical Society (SBQ) to offer free quality content for broad audiences. QNInt provides peer-reviewed articles from SBQ journals on science & society, chemical concepts, classroom activities and educational research. With 3,000,000 visits, QNInt also offers a unique library of interactive molecules. In the International Year of Chemistry QNInt served for distributing pH kits and registering data from IUPAC's Global Water Experiment, yielding Brazil the largest share of the global pH data set. The portal performance makes QNInt a valuable resource for connecting science to education.

HPV vaccines: a controversial issue?

Controversy still exists over whether the benefits of the available HPV vaccines outweigh the risks and this has suppressed uptake of the HPV vaccines in comparison to other vaccines. Concerns about HPV vaccine safety have led some physicians, healthcare officials and parents to withhold the recommended vaccination from the target population. The most common reason for not administering the prophylactic HPV vaccines are concerns over adverse effects. The aim of this review is the assessment of peer-reviewed scientific data related to measurable outcomes from the use of HPV vaccines throughout the world with focused attention on the potential adverse effects. We found that the majority of studies continue to suggest a positive risk-benefit from vaccination against HPV, with minimal documented adverse effects, which is consistent with other vaccines. However, much of the published scientific data regarding the safety of HPV vaccines appears to originate from within the financially competitive HPV vaccine market. We advocate a more independent monitoring system for vaccine immunogenicity and adverse effects to address potential conflicts of interest with regular systematic literature reviews by qualified individuals to vigilantly assess and communicate adverse effects associated with HPV vaccination. Finally, our evaluation suggests that an expanded use of HPV vaccine into more diverse populations, particularly those living in low-resource settings, would provide numerous health and social benefits.