How to reply to referees’ comments when submitting manuscripts for publication

Background: The publication of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals is a fairly complex and stepwise process that involves responding to referees’ comments. Little guidance is available in the biomedical literature on how to deal with such comments. Objective: The objective of this article is to provide guidance to novice writers on dealing with peer review comments in a way that maximizes the chance of subsequent acceptance. Methods: This will be a literature review and review of the author’s experience as a writer and referee. Results: Where possible, the author should consider revising and resubmitting rather than sending an article elsewhere. A structured layout for responding to referees’ comments is suggested that includes the 3 golden rules: (1) respond completely; (2) respond politely; and (3) respond with evidence. Conclusion: Responding to referees’ comments requires the writer to overcome any feelings of personal attack, and to instead concentrate on addressing referees’ concerns in a courteous, objective, and evidencebased way. (J Am Acad Dermatol 2004;51:79-83.)

Resolución 090 del 22 de julio de 2013: Por medio de la cual se resuelve un trámite de revocatoria directa en el registro mercantil

Servicios registrales

The fingerprinting of the materials used in portuguese illuminated manuscripts: origin, production and specificities of the 16th century Anttiphonary paints from the Biblioteca Pública de Évora

This thesis focuses on the characterization of materials utilized within the illuminations of Codex 116c of Manizola, a large 16th century antiphonal housed in the Biblioteca Pública de Évora (BPE). Using various spectroscopic techniques (XRF, FTIR, Raman and SEM-EDS), a selection of illuminations were analyzed for pigment and binder identification. The manuscript was further analyzed using fiber optic reflectance spectroscopy (FORS), a non-invasive and portable analysis method ideal for use in illuminations. Using historical documentation and results gained from more extensive analysis of the manuscript, a collection of reference paint samples were created to be analyzed using this method. These samples serve as a reference not only to assist in the identification of pigments used within the manuscript, but also for future studies on similar materials allowing for a better understanding of manuscript production during the 16th century; RESUMO: O presente trabalho é dedicado à caracterização dos materiais utilizados na produção das iluminuras do Codex 116c da Manziola do espólio da Biblioteca Pública de Évora (BPE). Trata-se de um antifonário de grandes dimensões produzido no séc XVI que deverá ter pertencido à Livraria de São Bento de Cástris. A identificação dos materiais utilizados na produção das iluminuras pode ser feita através de análises científicas. No entanto, alguns dos componentes das tintas utilizadas, especialmente os pigmentos orgânicos (lacas) e algumas misturas, apresentam obstáculos à sua identificação por métodos não invasivos. Através de várias técnicas espectroscópicas (XRF, FTIR, Raman e SEM-EDS), foi analisado um conjunto representativo de iluminuras, de modo a identificar os pigmentos e os ligantes presentes nas tintas. O manuscrito foi também analisado por FORS, um método portátil e não invasivo, ideal para a análise de iluminuras. Com base em documentos históricos e nos resultados analíticos, foi criado um conjunto de amostras de referência para ser analisado com FORS. Com esta abordagem, pretende-se que estas amostras, especialmente as de lacas, sirvam de referência não só na identificação dos pigmentos no manuscrito como em estudos sobre materiais semelhantes, contribuindo para um conhecimento mais aprofundado sobre a produção de manuscritos no séc XVI.

Validation of 3D models of the outer and inner surfaces of an ovine femur

The validation of Computed Tomography (CT) based 3D models takes an integral part in studies involving 3D models of bones. This is of particular importance when such models are used for Finite Element studies. The validation of 3D models typically involves the generation of a reference model representing the bones outer surface. Several different devices have been utilised for digitising a bone’s outer surface such as mechanical 3D digitising arms, mechanical 3D contact scanners, electro-magnetic tracking devices and 3D laser scanners. However, none of these devices is capable of digitising a bone’s internal surfaces, such as the medullary canal of a long bone. Therefore, this study investigated the use of a 3D contact scanner, in conjunction with a microCT scanner, for generating a reference standard for validating the internal and external surfaces of a CT based 3D model of an ovine femur. One fresh ovine limb was scanned using a clinical CT scanner (Phillips, Brilliance 64) with a pixel size of 0.4 mm2 and slice spacing of 0.5 mm. Then the limb was dissected to obtain the soft tissue free bone while care was taken to protect the bone’s surface. A desktop mechanical 3D contact scanner (Roland DG Corporation, MDX 20, Japan) was used to digitise the surface of the denuded bone. The scanner was used with the resolution of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.025 mm. The digitised surfaces were reconstructed into a 3D model using reverse engineering techniques in Rapidform (Inus Technology, Korea). After digitisation, the distal and proximal parts of the bone were removed such that the shaft could be scanned with a microCT (µCT40, Scanco Medical, Switzerland) scanner. The shaft, with the bone marrow removed, was immersed in water and scanned with a voxel size of 0.03 mm3. The bone contours were extracted from the image data utilising the Canny edge filter in Matlab (The Mathswork).. The extracted bone contours were reconstructed into 3D models using Amira 5.1 (Visage Imaging, Germany). The 3D models of the bone’s outer surface reconstructed from CT and microCT data were compared against the 3D model generated using the contact scanner. The 3D model of the inner canal reconstructed from the microCT data was compared against the 3D models reconstructed from the clinical CT scanner data. The disparity between the surface geometries of two models was calculated in Rapidform and recorded as average distance with standard deviation. The comparison of the 3D model of the whole bone generated from the clinical CT data with the reference model generated a mean error of 0.19±0.16 mm while the shaft was more accurate(0.08±0.06 mm) than the proximal (0.26±0.18 mm) and distal (0.22±0.16 mm) parts. The comparison between the outer 3D model generated from the microCT data and the contact scanner model generated a mean error of 0.10±0.03 mm indicating that the microCT generated models are sufficiently accurate for validation of 3D models generated from other methods. The comparison of the inner models generated from microCT data with that of clinical CT data generated an error of 0.09±0.07 mm Utilising a mechanical contact scanner in conjunction with a microCT scanner enabled to validate the outer surface of a CT based 3D model of an ovine femur as well as the surface of the model’s medullary canal.

Thinking Collaboratively about the Peer-Review Process for Journal- Article Publication

In this conversation, Kevin K. Kumashiro shares his reflections on challenges to publishing anti-oppressive research in educational journals. He then invites eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals--William F. Pinar, Elizabeth Graue, Carl A. Grant, Maenette K. P. Benham, Ronald H. Heck, James Joseph Scheurich, Allan Luke, and Carmen Luke--to critique and expand on his analysis. Kumashiro begins the conversation by describing his own experiences submitting manuscripts to educational research journals and receiving comments by anonymous reviewers and journal editors. He suggests three ways to rethink the collaborative potential of the peer-review process: as constructive, as multilensed, and as situated. The eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals then critique and expand Kumashiro's analysis. Kumashiro concludes the conversation with additional reflections on barriers and contradictions involved in advancing anti-oppressive educational research in educational journals. (Contains 3 notes.)

The pitfalls of publicizing ethics research

What happens to our research once it hits the popular media? Do marketers know how to promote our research in a way that is understandable and complete, while still capturing an audience? This case study follows the dissemination of the results of a consumer ethics study via a single press release, along with the resulting media coverage, interviews and audience comments. Perhaps in their quest for a touch of controversy, the story picked up by the popular press was not the one intended by the authors. If getting the public story right is important, marketing academics need to spend as much time carefully crafting their press releases as they do writing journal manuscripts – they may not be able to rely on the ethics of media sub-editors who choose controversial headlines.