This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Michael Springer

Arch Intern Med. 1993;153(1):19.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THE WORLD of scientific information has changed dramatically since the ARCHIVES started publication in 1908. Not only has the number of medical journals grown exponentially,¹ but the means of receiving information has expanded to include audio and video communications, online databases, compact disks, and satellites.

What is mildly astonishing is that during this epoch of revolutionary change in the information world, the physical aspects of peer-reviewed scientific journals have changed very little. Aside from better-quality photographs, one would have to look closely to tell the difference between a medical journal published in 1900 and most that are produced in the 1990s.

The conventional wisdom in scientific publishing has always been that serious information has to look boring to be credible. The ARCHIVES hopes to challenge that assumption. The crush of material physicians receive demands that information be readable and easy to access. How many medical journals fit that description? . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Associate Publisher AMA Specialty Journals

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?