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
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:


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?

"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

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?

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.