19. Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for
which the reproduction of a particular work may be
considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Copyright protects the particular way an author has
expressed himself. It does not extend to any ideas,
systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.
U.S. Copyright Law
ā¦ but is confusing and too
restrictive for many researchers
24. Anorexia Nausea Vomiting Dysgeusia
18% 13%
28% 28%
ā¦ and visualize them as needed
25. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/328/5979/710/DC1
Supporting Online Material for
A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome
Richard E. Green,* Johannes Krause, Adrian W. Briggs, Tomislav Maricic,
Udo Stenzel, Martin Kircher, Nick Patterson, Heng Li, Weiwei Zhai,
Markus Hsi-Yang Fritz, Nancy F. Hansen, Eric Y. Durand, Anna-Sapfo Malaspinas,
Jeffrey D. Jensen, Tomas Marques-Bonet, Can Alkan, Kay PrĆ¼fer, Matthias Meyer,
HernƔn A. Burbano, Jeffrey M. Good, Rigo Schultz, Ayinuer Aximu-Petri, Anne Butthof,
Barbara Hƶber, Barbara Hƶffner, Madlen Siegemund, Antje Weihmann, Chad Nusbaum,
Eric S. Lander, Carsten Russ, Nathaniel Novod, Jason Affourtit, Michael Egholm,
Christine Verna, Pavao Rudan, Dejana Brajkovic, !eljko Kucan, Ivan Gu"ic,
Vladimir B. Doronichev, Liubov V. Golovanova, Carles Lalueza-Fox,
Marco de la Rasilla, Javier Fortea, Antonio Rosas, Ralf W. Schmitz, Philip L. F. Johnson,
Evan E. Eichler, Daniel Falush, Ewan Birney, James C. Mullikin, Montgomery Slatkin,
Rasmus Nielsen, Janet Kelso, Michael Lachmann, David Reich,* Svante PƤƤbo*
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: green@eva.mpg.de (R.E.G.);
reich@genetics.med.harvard.edu (D.R.); paabo@eva.mpg.de (S.P.)
Published 7 May 2010, Science 328, 710 (2010)
DOI: 10.1126/science.1188021
This PDF file includes:
Materials and Methods
SOM Text
Access to
Figs. S1 to S51
Tables S1 to S58
References research data
26. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/328/5979/710/DC1
Supporting Online Material for
A Draft Sequence of the Neandertal Genome
Richard E. Green,* Johannes Krause, Adrian W. Briggs, Tomislav Maricic,
Udo Stenzel, Martin Kircher, Nick Patterson, Heng Li, Weiwei Zhai,
Markus Hsi-Yang Fritz, Nancy F. Hansen, Eric Y. Durand, Anna-Sapfo Malaspinas,
Jeffrey D. Jensen, Tomas Marques-Bonet, Can Alkan, Kay PrĆ¼fer, Matthias Meyer,
HernƔn A. Burbano, Jeffrey M. Good, Rigo Schultz, Ayinuer Aximu-Petri, Anne Butthof,
Barbara Hƶber, Barbara Hƶffner, Madlen Siegemund, Antje Weihmann, Chad Nusbaum,
Eric S. Lander, Carsten Russ, Nathaniel Novod, Jason Affourtit, Michael Egholm,
Christine Verna, Pavao Rudan, Dejana Brajkovic, !eljko Kucan, Ivan Gu"ic,
Vladimir B. Doronichev, Liubov V. Golovanova, Carles Lalueza-Fox,
Marco de la Rasilla, Javier Fortea, Antonio Rosas, Ralf W. Schmitz, Philip L. F. Johnson,
Evan E. Eichler, Daniel Falush, Ewan Birney, James C. Mullikin, Montgomery Slatkin,
Rasmus Nielsen, Janet Kelso, Michael Lachmann, David Reich,* Svante PƤƤbo*
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: green@eva.mpg.de (R.E.G.);
reich@genetics.med.harvard.edu (D.R.); paabo@eva.mpg.de (S.P.)
Published 7 May 2010, Science 328, 710 (2010)
DOI: 10.1126/science.1188021
PDF with
This PDF file includes:
Materials and Methods
SOM Text
Access to
175 pages?
Figs. S1 to S51
Tables S1 to S58
References research data
36. Encourage electronic letters
RESEARCH
Adequacy of authorsā replies to criticism raised in electronic
letters to the editor: cohort study
Peter C GĆøtzsche, director,1 Tony Delamothe, editor,2 Fiona Godlee, editor,2 Andreas Lundh, PhD student1
1
Nordic Cochrane Centre, ABSTRACT publication of the research report. Guidelines for edi-
Rigshospitalet and University of Objective To investigate whether substantive criticism in tors are also sparse.3-5
Copenhagen, Dept 3343,
Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 electronic letters to the editor, defined as a problem that We have noticed that when the criticism is serious,
Copenhagen, Denmark could invalidate the research or reduce its reliability, is such as suggesting a fatal flaw, authors sometimes
2
BMJ, BMA House, Tavistock adequately addressed by the authors. avoid addressing it in their reply and instead discuss
Square, London
Design Cohort study. minor issues, or they misrepresent their research or
Correspondence to: P C GĆøtzsche
pcg@cochrane.dk SettingBMJ between October 2005 and September 2007. the criticism. It is not known how common evasive
Inclusion criteria Research papers generating substantive replies are or how often editors assess whether authors
Cite this as: BMJ 2010;341:c3926 have addressed criticisms appropriately and honestly
doi:10.1136/bmj.c3926
criticism in the rapid responses section on bmj.com.
Main outcome measures Severity of criticism (minor, and ask for changes when this is not the case. We inves-
moderate, or major) as judged by two editors and extent tigated whether authors responded adequately to sub-
to which the criticism was addressed by authors (fully, stantive criticism after publication and whether the
partly, or not) as judged by two editors and the critics. critics and the editors were satisfied with the replies.
Results A substantive criticism was raised against 105 of
350 (30%, 95% confidence interval 25% to 35%) METHODS
included research papers, and of these the authors had Our objectives were to study whether substantive criti-
responded to 47 (45%, 35% to 54%). The severity of the cism in letters to the editor was adequately addressed
criticism was the same in those papers as in the 58 by authors, and whether the replies were less adequate
without author replies (mean score 2.2 in both groups, when the criticism was serious. We defined substantive
P=0.72). For the 47 criticisms with replies, there was no criticism as a problem that could invalidate the
relation between the severity of the criticism and the research or reduce its reliability.
43. Facilitate reference creation
Bollen, J., VanĀ de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A. & Chute, R. A
principal component analysis of 39 scientiļ¬c impact measures.
PloS ONE 4, e6022+ (2009).
J.Ā Bollen, H.Ā VanĀ de Sompel, A.Ā Hagberg, R.Ā Chute, PloS ONE 4,
e6022+ (2009).
Bollen Johan, Sompel Herbert, Hagberg Aric, Chute Ryan. A
principal component analysis of 39 scientiļ¬c impact measures. PloS
ONE. 2009;4:e6022+.
J.Ā Bollen, etĀ al. (2009). `A principal component analysis of 39
scientiļ¬c impact measures.'. PloS ONE 4(6):e6022+.
This important paper provides evidence that scientiļ¬c impact can
not be adequately measured by any single indicator.
44. tributing papers should also submit via the Web. Corresponding
PNAS Information for Authors
authors of communicated and contributed papers will be pro-
vided a URL for ļ¬le submission after the member has initiated
the process by providing his or her endorsement and copies of
REVISED November also be submitted online.
the reviews received. SI must 2009
Digital Figures. Only TIFF, EPS, and high-resolution PDF for
Mac or PC are allowedSCOPE that will appear in the print
PURPOSE AND for ļ¬gures
journal. (See Supporting Information below for online-only ma-
terial.) Color images must theinNational Academy of Sciences U
The Proceedings of be RGB (red, green, blue) mode.
(PNAS) publishes research reports, commentaries, perspecti -
erably 1 column width (8.7 cm). Figures wider with 1 column
and colloquium papers. In accordance than the guiding prin
should be between 10.5 and 18.0 cm wide. Numbers, letters,
ples established be no smallerEllery Hale in 1914,and no publis
and symbols should
by George than 6 points (2 mm) PNAS
larger than 12 points (6 mm) after reduction and must be con- foreign
brief ļ¬rst announcements of Academy membersā and
sociatesā (hereafter referred to as members) more important c
sistent. Composite ļ¬gures must be preassembled. Figures must
be submitted as separate ļ¬les, notof work thatmanuscriptto a membe
tributions to research and embedded in appears text.
See www.pnas.org/site/misc/digitalart.pdf oris a general science jour
be of particular importance. PNAS contact pnas_spe-
cialist@dartmouthjournals.com.
Facilitate ļ¬gure creation
with a broad scientiļ¬c audience. All papers should be intellig
Tables. Each table should have a brief title, be on a separate
page,this audience.
to and be double-spaced. Tables must be submitted as sepa-
