Publication: Recommendations - Revision history

Isabelle at 07:09, 20 April 2021

2021-04-20T07:09:07Z

2021-04-15T14:22:10Z

2021-03-24T13:02:05Z

2021-03-16T11:24:54Z

2021-03-16T11:24:15Z

2021-03-16T11:22:50Z

2021-03-16T11:22:26Z

2021-03-16T11:12:23Z

2021-03-16T11:10:01Z

2021-03-16T10:54:54Z

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 * Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].
-* [[https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/2.4.2_Publication EQIPD Recommendations on publication]]
+* [https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/2.4.2_Publication EQIPD Recommendations on publication]
 [[Start_here|Go back to menu]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:22, 15 April 2021
Line 13:		Line 13:

	* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf\|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].		* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf\|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].
		+
		+	* [[https://eqipd-toolbox.paasp.net/wiki/2.4.2_Publication EQIPD Recommendations on publication]]


	[[Start_here\|Go back to menu]]		[[Start_here\|Go back to menu]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:02, 24 March 2021
Line 13:		Line 13:

	* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf\|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].		* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf\|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].
		+
		+
		+	[[Start_here\|Go back to menu]]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 * Guidelines from RMS:
-:: The guiding principles on acknowledging and co-authoring CF by the Royal Microscopical Society is supplemented with a template for contracts clarifying the relationship between CF and research unit [https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html]: [[:File:RMS_publication_policy.docx|RMS CFs publication policy]]
+:: The guiding principles on acknowledging and co-authoring CF by the Royal Microscopical Society is supplemented with a template for contracts clarifying the relationship between CF and research unit [https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html]: [[:File:RMS_publication_policy.docx|RMS CFs publication policy]].
-* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf|ABRF Guidelines for authorship.pdf]]
+* Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf|ABRF Guidelines for authorship]].

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 '''Other recommendations'''
-The guiding principles on acknowledging and co-authoring CF by the Royal Microscopical Society is supplemented with a template for contracts clarifying the relationship between CF and research unit [https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html]: [[:File:RMS_publication_policy.docx|RMS CFs publication policy]
+* Guidelines from RMS:
-Guidelines from ABRF: [[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf|ABRF Guidelines for authorship.pdf]]
+:: The guiding principles on acknowledging and co-authoring CF by the Royal Microscopical Society is supplemented with a template for contracts clarifying the relationship between CF and research unit [https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html]: [[:File:RMS_publication_policy.docx|RMS CFs publication policy]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:12, 16 March 2021
Line 10:		Line 10:
	https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html [https://pixl8-cloud-rms.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/public/uploaded/1ac894d9-8e7d-46a8-af5c4a8f7be8f0b6.docx]		https://www.rms.org.uk/resources-downloads/core-facilities-publication-policy.html [https://pixl8-cloud-rms.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/public/uploaded/1ac894d9-8e7d-46a8-af5c4a8f7be8f0b6.docx]

−	~~https://abrf.org/authorship-guidelines~~ [~~https~~:~~//web.archive.org/web/20150503030421/http~~:~~//www~~.~~abrf.org/Other/ABRF_Recommended_Guidelines_for_Authorship_on_Manuscripts10-07-11-1~~.pdf]	+	[[:File:ABRF_Guidelines_for_authorship.pdf\|ABRF Guidelines for authorship.pdf]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Provide detailed information for writing the “materials & methods” section of a publication (or thesis) so that experiments can be replicated. Do not write the method was “as previously described” if you made small changes. You can upload your step-by-step protocol in a repository (for example https://www.protocols.io).
-The users should '''inform''' the CF before submitting a manuscript containing data acquired at the CF. The CF should have the right to check the relevant sections and validate the corresponding figures before publication. This is the last opportunity for the CF to '''check''' data quality.  Over 90% of CFs believe that the quality of published data would improve if they were involved:
+Instruct the users that they should '''inform''' the CF before submitting a manuscript containing data acquired at the CF. The CF should be given the possibility to check the relevant sections and validate the corresponding figures before publication. This is the last opportunity for the CF to '''check''' data quality.  Over 90% of CFs believe that the quality of published data would improve if they were involved:
 * “ensures correct understanding and an accurate account of what happened.”
 * “[CF] can view the data unbiased”.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:54, 16 March 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Provide detailed information for writing the “materials & methods” section of a publication (or thesis) so that experiments can be replicated. Do not write the method was “as previously described” if you made small changes. You can upload your step-by-step protocol in a repository (for example www.protocols.io).	+	Provide detailed information for writing the “materials & methods” section of a publication (or thesis) so that experiments can be replicated. Do not write the method was “as previously described” if you made small changes. You can upload your step-by-step protocol in a repository (for example https://www.protocols.io).

	The users should '''inform''' the CF before submitting a manuscript containing data acquired at the CF. The CF should have the right to check the relevant sections and validate the corresponding figures before publication. This is the last opportunity for the CF to '''check''' data quality. Over 90% of CFs believe that the quality of published data would improve if they were involved:		The users should '''inform''' the CF before submitting a manuscript containing data acquired at the CF. The CF should have the right to check the relevant sections and validate the corresponding figures before publication. This is the last opportunity for the CF to '''check''' data quality. Over 90% of CFs believe that the quality of published data would improve if they were involved: