An inside view: We recently had a situation where an author requested, late in game, that a comma be inserted into his manuscript. Long story short, we had to stop the presses, as it were, because the placement of this particular comma actually changed the meaning of the sentence, which would have mislead doctors and may have led to a negative patient outcome downstream. My vote would be in favor of always using the final, fully redacted version, if available. Cynthia Rose Publications Coordinator Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine www.jabfm.org Wayne State University, Department of Family Medicine 101 East Alexandrine, Detroit, MI 48201 [log in to unmask] Phone: 313-577-5205 Fax: 313-577-9828 -----Original Message----- From: Medical Libraries Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of T Scott Plutchak Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 8:10 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: author manuscripts This is a great question, and one that we will be increasingly faced with. I've posted some comments here: http://tscott.typepad.com/tsp/2006/03/the_versioning_.html Scott T. Scott Plutchak Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences University of Alabama at Birmingham [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: Medical Libraries Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Blackwell, Lisa Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 8:50 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: author manuscripts Everyone, sorry to beat a dead horse, but I must correct a statement that I made below. It's not true "that same manuscript won't be available when the edited version is published" as I stated in my commentary. Obviously, I didn't read carefully enough. However, my basic question stands. How will this impact scholarly publication and how do librarians advise patrons about which version to rely upon for their own research? And, is it going to be a legitimate practice to fill ILL requests with author manuscripts? Lisa "The Endocrine Society is very pleased to announce a new benefit for authors and readers. Molecular Endocrinology now publishes reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance. REP (Rapid Electronic Publication) makes research papers accessible to subscribers up to 12 weeks before the print and online journals are published. Articles published in REP are citable by a unique DOI (Digital Object Identifier), which will also appear in the final printed article. PDF's of accepted manuscripts are published in REP exactly as they are submitted, without copyediting, reformatting, or corrections. Authors will still make corrections for the copyedited manuscript that will appear in print and in the final online version. When the final version of the article is published in print, it will also be published online and will replace the REP version. The REP version will be archived and will remain available for reference." Since our researchers want everything NOW, they've been asking for those manuscripts. That means that they will most likely be citing the manuscripts in their own publications. However, that same manuscript won't be available when the edited version is published. Future researchers will then be requesting materials cited that were manuscript versions leading to sxome very frustrated ILL librarians. Pretty similar situation to when we get requests for citations to drug-company sponsored supplements to journals that we usually toss. So, do we advise the researcher to wait for the final version for citation purposes knowing all of this about manuscripts available on journal sites or do we just let the researchers worry about what they are citing themselves? Has any library made some serious decisions about how to handle this? Lisa ----------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, from Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. The recipient is responsible to maintain the confidentiality of this information and to use the information only for authorized purposes pursuant to Children's Hospital's confidentiality policies. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, copying, printing, or action taken in reliance on the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.