“On behalf of all authors of the submission, I warrant that the work is original and scientifically accurate ...” If you’ve submitted a manuscript to the Journal of Clinical Investigation or JCI Insight, this phrase should sound familiar. This statement is the very first thing that we ask authors to verify for every new submission. While this may seem like a simple formality or just another screen to click through, certifying the accuracy of information presented to the journal is essential to the publishing process and scientific integrity. Data accuracy forms the foundation of the scientific enterprise, and without it, the enterprise risks crumbling.
Sarah Jackson, Corinne L. Williams, Kathleen L. Collins, Elizabeth M. McNally
Usage data is cumulative from November 2023 through November 2024.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 1,113 | 199 |
348 | 27 | |
Citation downloads | 120 | 0 |
Totals | 1,581 | 226 |
Total Views | 1,807 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.