FromtheEditor MAKING THE BEST COMPARISONS
Lately, we have received a number of manuscripts comparing different methods, kits, or instruments. While these articles are potentially useful to our readers, they vary tremendously in terms of depth of analysis, making the potential impact difficult to evaluate. On one hand, this information can assist researchers in making informed decisions as to which methods and instruments to use for their own research. On the other hand, providing a truly complete and thorough appraisal of all options when so many unique methodologies and experimental platforms are being published and commercialized is a daunting task. Given these consider- ations, we would like to provide a few simple suggestions for writing such articles.
Compare existing approaches to a “novel” methodology. The strongest comparison articles are those that, after examining all of the available options for a particular method, present a new and novel modification or innovation that expands experi- mental possibilities. In these cases, readers will not only obtain insights into the available approaches but will also learn a unique solution to a drawback that might impact the outcome of their own experiments.
Include all possibilities. If you are going to present a strong comparison, then you need to include all relevant methods, techniques, and/or instruments. Excluding approaches leaves readers (and reviewers) without a well-rounded knowledge base, making it difficult to arrive at a truly informed decision on the approach that best fits a particular experimental need. In addition, it is important to discuss factors such as cost, time, difficulty, or the need for unusual equipment, as these are all important practical considerations.
Identify a “gold standard” for comparison. In most instances, there will be a gold standard method to which all other approaches should be compared. When examining a number of different methods, try to identify and use that gold standard in order to increase the relevance of your results. Most researchers in the field should have knowledge and experience with that gold standard approach.
Be neutral. Your goal should be to provide a truly balanced assessment. When it comes to methods, all have benefits and drawbacks. While some approaches might be easier and faster to use than others, they might also be more expensive or more subject to experimental variation. Researchers decide on a method or instrument based on their research needs as well as other practical considerations, such as cost and labor. Detailing the benefits and drawbacks of each option will help others determine which method or instrument best suits their needs.
Hopefully, our suggestions will assist authors in crafting manuscripts that inform and educate on the technical options for specific experiments. Please send any thoughts or comments on this topic to
bioeditor@biotechniques.com.
BioTechniques is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of original laboratory methods, related technical tools, and methods-oriented review articles that are of broad interest to scientists engaged in basic and applied life science research. Complete
Instructions for Authors are available at
bt.EditorialManager.com, BioTechniques’ website for online manuscript submission. All manuscripts should be submitted at this site.
Vol. 58 | No. 5 | 2015 213
BioTechniques Staff
Editorial, Production & Circulation Editor-in-Chief: Nathan S. Blow, Ph.D. Managing Editor: Amy R. Volpert Senior Editor/Commercial Editor: Patrick C.H. Lo, Ph.D. Senior Editor/News Editor: Kristie Nybo, Ph.D.
Contributing Writers: Jeffrey M. Perkel, Ph.D., and Sarah A. Webb, Ph.D.
Production and Creative Manager, BioScience Group: Genevieve McCarthy
Director, Operations and Audience Development, BioScience Group: Nora Pastenkos
Marketing Manager, BioScience Group: Damon Mastandrea
Sales & Business Offices
Publisher: Tamaryn Hankinson,
tamaryn.hankinson@informa.com
Global Sales Director/East Coast: Cheryl Wall, 978-356-0032
cwall@biotechniques.com
Midwest: Bob Zander, 312-925-7648
bob.zander@
informausa.com
West Coast: Kayla McCutchan, 212-652-2667
kmccutchan@biotechniques.com
Europe/Asia/Latin America: Joshua Nathan, +44 (0) 207 017 5472
joshua.nathan@
informa.com
Manager, Advertising and Production Services, BioScience Group: Christine Briglia
christine.briglia@
informausa.com List Rental: Amy Miller •
amiller@ibcusa.com Reprints:
biotechniques@fosterprinting.com
For subscriptions and inquiries, contact: Phone: (847) 763-4930 Toll-free: (877) 232-2399 Email:
biotechniques@halldata.com
EditorialBoard
Bill Brizzard, Indiana University Research and Technology Corp.
Bruce Budowle, UNT Health Science Center Piotr Chomczynski, Molecular Research Center
Rita R. Colwell, University of Maryland-College Park and Johns Hopkins University Joshua J. Coon, University of Wisconsin-Madison Manel Esteller, Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO) Jeffrey Felton, Western University of Health Sciences Ron M. Fourney, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Ivar Giaever, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Richard A. Gibbs, Baylor College of Medicine Erica A. Golemis, Fox Chase Cancer Center Peter M. Gresshoff, The University of Queensland Yoshihide Hayashizaki, RIKEN Jörg Hoheisel, German Cancer Research Center Leroy Hood, Institute for Systems Biology Paul Keim, Northern Arizona University Pui-Yan Kwok, University of California, San Francisco Rachael L. Neve, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Peter J. Oefner, University of Regensburg Stephen W. Paddock,University of Wisconsin-Madison Scott D. Patterson, Amgen, Inc. Leonard F. Peruski, Jr., Centers for Disease Control John Quackenbush, Harvard School of Public Health Pier Giorgio Righetti, Polytechnic University of Milan John Rossi, City of Hope Herbert P. Schweizer, Colorado State University Jay Shendure, University of Washington Barton Slatko, New England Biolabs Steve S. Sommer, MEDomics, LLC Igor Stagljar, University of Toronto Mathias Uhlén, The Royal Institute of Technology Timothy Veenstra, SAIC-Frederick, Inc. Kent E. Vrana, Penn State College of Medicine Michael Weiner, AxioMx
www.BioTechniques.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68