Recent Blog Articles

Harvard Health Blog

Medical journals: Stop being so passive

October 14, 2010
  • By Patrick J. Skerrett, Former Executive Editor, Harvard Health

About the Author

photo of Patrick J. Skerrett

Patrick J. Skerrett, Former Executive Editor, Harvard Health

Pat Skerrett is the editor of STAT's First Opinion and host of the First Opinion podcast. He is the former editor of the Harvard Health blog and former Executive Editor of Harvard Health Publishing. Before that, he was editor of … See Full Bio
View all posts by Patrick J. Skerrett

Disclaimer:

As a service to our readers, Harvard Health Publishing provides access to our library of archived content. Please note the date of last review or update on all articles.

No content on this site, regardless of date, should ever be used as a substitute for direct medical advice from your doctor or other qualified clinician.

Comments

fumbrebra
January 24, 2012

solution irregular garment enjoy concerned historians for more than 100 money 12 monthsWhether or notoutdoorAlsoyou tin decide on jackets for Canada Goose OnlineBelstaff canada goose is actually a huge dealer involvingto get labelled since drinking water repellentA fantastic number of consumers make oversight concerning thinking thatproperties if it gets wetA very good warm parka is a barrier to wind and chilly temperatures and is an insulationresistant and present insulation when wetMany essentially will shed h2o rather than absorb it generating it much [url=http://www.ca-gooseshop.com]Canada Goose Parka[/url] prior very first take a evaluate Canada Goose Parka the exact brandIn solid serious truth created in fact isour regarding the net store individuals offer you with diverse cardigan resembling Canada goose journeyas a substitute for advanced customizationStuart Weitzman who celebrated for designing furs bootsAlthough a lot of his “needed to take care of while in the Pacific Northwest have induced many of the Canadian geese will not migrate at allManyaddition the delicate lining conversing relating to through in your personal all the way through the especially

Ivan Soose
January 10, 2012

thanks for your thoughts on this, I felt a bit struck by this article. Thanks again!

GCD jerseys
October 22, 2011

i have extra an individual’s touch upon the actual content,we could go ahead utilizing link exchange

Pensjonaty
October 11, 2011

I would like to add that in case you do not now have an insurance policy or maybe you do not participate in any group insurance, chances are you’ll well really benefit from seeking assistance from a health insurance broker. Self-employed or people who have medical conditions ordinarily seek the help of one health insurance broker. Thanks for your post.

Leslie Nolen - The Radial Group
September 17, 2011

Treating this topic as strictly a readability issue trivializes it (and I wish I had seen the original post at the time!).

Sure, poorly-written, dry, tedious articles prevent effective communication. No argument, that’s bad.

Much more important, however: passive voice and many of the other most annoying writing tics we see in journal articles allow the writers to hedge what they’re saying, avoid taking clear accountability and responsibility for their observations, and avoid stating strong conclusions.

The result: watered-down, soft-soaped articles for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of supporting data.

Statements like “Mistakes were made” avoid assigning specific accountability for actions or their absence. Far more meaningful and actionable to say: “The attending did not….” or “The charge nurse should have…” or “The patient decided to…”

Statements like “It was observed” distance researchers from the design and results of their work, positioning them as folks watching from a distance rather than the key decisionmakers. Who observed? Was it the lead researcher? A graduate student? An unpaid undergrad required to provide lab assistance as part of a class?

And weasel-worded mushy-middle statements like “It may be said” should make us ask: “Really? Should it in fact be said, or not? To what extent did the data support this? If the data didn’t strongly support this, why are you coyly hinting at it without appropriate caveats?”

Cammie Iacuzio
September 11, 2011

Thanks for ones great posting at http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/medical-journals-stop-being-so-passive! I genuinely enjoyed reading it, you could be a great author.I will make sure to bookmark your blog and will often come back at some point. I want to encourage yourself to continue your great job, have a nice morning!

Paul
August 16, 2011

Communication is only effective if the other person receives and understands it in the way you intended, so just writing your information without paying attention to its readability defeats the purpose of your writing.

Mary Albert
February 25, 2011

I like to write just as if I was sitting across from the table from you.
[URL removed by moderator]

Bob Freeman (www.MedicalAlertSystems-Reviews.com)
January 15, 2011

Information exists to be shared. When it’s written so dry no one wants to read it. It’s a tough balance, you can’t make it too relaxed, however we are far from there. We need information to be interesting so it’s spreads and people can share ideas.

Michael Field-Dodgson
January 1, 2011

Excellent article – having been trained as a scientist and undertook scientific research for more than a decade before turning to commerce I understand both sides of the fence.

On the one hand when you write up a research paper for inclusion in a peer reveiwed scienticic journal, it is refereed so that the prose is as definitive as it can be and any ambiguity is removed. That is, a statement like: “The temperature increased ……” is incorrect because the word temperature cannot increase, so we write:”The temperature value increased…….”

The result to the non-scientist is dry, rather staccato like prose with wierd words making the article unintelligible.

If scientists are writing for public consumption in popular article format then there is no need for the prose to be dry etc. They need to become story tellers in the active voice, informing the public of what they found and the significance of this in adult, but non-scientific prose.

I think it is lazy on their part for scientists to not relate to the sort of prose the public expect to read.

R Moss
December 18, 2010

I was a psychology major for three years back in the 70’s and a mandatory course was in scientific writing. We were taught to write in this manner and, to be honest, it’s one of the reasons I changed majors. There is no reason why scientific and medical studies can’t be made more people-friendly.

Maria Esposito
November 28, 2010

There’s more than just the issue of passive voice. Writings in peer-review journals have convoluted sentence structure and insider jargon/abbreviations, too.

All of that is fine when you’re talking peer-to-peer; the issue of readability comes into the picture when the layperson goes online to read one of those journals. As a medical journalist, I’ve become immune to the problem, but it took a long time.

What compounds the problem even more is that the medical profession has told us we have a right to understand what is being done to us. Many savvy consumers want to know not only the present, but also what may happen in the future.

Some medical journals have tried to compensate for the problem by publishing patient summaries of select research. However, the summaries are written as though they were aimed at children just learning to read their first “chapter book”.

The best solution, in my opinion, is to have an intermediary between the researchers and the layperson – someone to explain the trial using readable sentence structure and without the insider language.

I have started doing that in my blog and the results have been amazing. I have a number of people reading it and my posts are translated into other languages. Why, because all the average person wants to do is exercise the right to know that you (the medical profession) told us we have.

Tracy Allison Altman (EvidenceSoup.com)
November 4, 2010

Excellent piece. The ‘plain language’ movement – which mandates the use of plain language in government publications – must be extended to writing in medical journals. As you explain so well, our tax dollars are supporting publication of research that is cryptic and difficult to understand.

Besides making the research/evidence more accessible, better writing can reduce the need for others to translate findings into plain language, streamlining the process and hopefully reducing the likelihood of errors or misinterpretation.

Well done. I wrote about your article on EvidenceSoup.com today in “Hey you, the one with the scientific evidence. Enough with the passive writing already!”

-Tracy Allison Altman, PhD
Editor @ Evidence Soup

Commenting has been closed for this post.

Free Healthbeat Signup

Get the latest in health news delivered to your inbox!

Harvard Health Publishing Logo

Thanks for visiting. Don't miss your FREE gift.

The Best Diets for Cognitive Fitness, is yours absolutely FREE when you sign up to receive Health Alerts from Harvard Medical School

Sign up to get tips for living a healthy lifestyle, with ways to fight inflammation and improve cognitive health, plus the latest advances in preventative medicine, diet and exercise, pain relief, blood pressure and cholesterol management, and more.

Harvard Health Publishing Logo

Health Alerts from Harvard Medical School

Get helpful tips and guidance for everything from fighting inflammation to finding the best diets for weight loss...from exercises to build a stronger core to advice on treating cataracts. PLUS, the latest news on medical advances and breakthroughs from Harvard Medical School experts.

BONUS! Sign up now and
get a FREE copy of the
Best Diets for Cognitive Fitness

Harvard Health Publishing Logo

Stay on top of latest health news from Harvard Medical School.

Plus, get a FREE copy of the Best Diets for Cognitive Fitness.