Unfortunately I wasn’t there, but I followed the tweets (see Storify for a selection). And for a more in depth coverage: the webcasts of the plenary sessions are still online here.
In the Cochrane Colloquium Announcement the blue logo is replaced by a Cochrane logo in “New-Zealand” style (or whatever).
A few entities have permanently adapted the Cochrane Logo.
Below are the logos of the Canadian and the Brazilian Cochrane Centres and the Cochrane Public Health group
It illustrates very well the Farewell-feeling….. a memorable (Cochrane) meeting in a fabulous country (although these memories will slowly fade away, taken by the sea)
The Diamond in the Cochrane Logo (the result of the metaanalysis) is standardly called Wybertje by the director of the Dutch Cochrane Centre, because its format resembles a Dutch liquorice with that name. (if you don’t believe me, then read the text of his oration speech: “Hoe sterk is het eenzame bewijs” (“how strong is the solitary evidence”, which alludes to a Dutch song)
Perhaps because he is fond of liquorice and sweets, coworkers once gave him M &M’s with the Cochrane logo on it (below is a photo-shopped version).
I also like to play with the Cochrane Logo. For instance, when I gave a presentation at the OLVG, a Dutch hospital, I changed the O into the Cochrane logo (left: the OLVG logo, right: the logo in my presentation)
Indeed at Life at the Fast Lane they have fun posts amidst the serious (mostly ER) topics. Want more Friday Fun than have a look at the Funtabulously Frivolous Friday Five Posts.
With many thanks to Michelynn McKnight, PhD, AHIP, Associate Professor, School of Library and Information Science, Louisiana State University, who put it on the MEDLIB-L listserv, saying : “Not exactly structured …. but a great laugh!”
Peer review is never funny, you think.
It is hard to review papers, especially when they are poorly written. From the author’s point of view, it is annoying and frustrating to see a paper rejected on basis of comments of peer reviewers, who either don’t understand the paper or thwart you in your attempts to get the paper published, for instance because you are a competitor in the field.
Still, from a (great) distance the peer review process can be funny… in some respects.
Read for instance a collection of memorable quotes from peer review critiques of the past year in Environmental Microbiology (EM does this each December). Here are some excerpts:
Done! Difficult task, I don’t wish to think about constipation and faecal flora during my holidays!
This paper is desperate. Please reject it completely and then block the author’s email ID so they can’t use the online system in future.
It is sad to see so much enthusiasm and effort go into analyzing a dataset that is just not big enough.
The abstract and results read much like a laundry list.
.. I would suggest that EM is setting up a fund that pays for the red wine reviewers may need to digest manuscripts like this one.
I have to admit that I would have liked to reject this paper because I found the tone in the Reply to the Reviewers so annoying.
I started to review this but could not get much past the abstract.
This paper is awfully written. There is no adequate objective and no reasonable conclusion. The literature is quoted at random and not in the context of argument…
Stating that the study is confirmative is not a good start for the Discussion.
I suppose that I should be happy that I don’t have to spend a lot of time reviewing this dreadful paper; however I am depressed that people are performing such bad science.
Preliminary and intriguing results that should be published elsewhere.
Reject – More holes than my grandad’s string vest!
The writing and data presentation are so bad that I had to leave work and go home early and then spend time to wonder what life is about.
Very much enjoyed reading this one, and do not have any significant comments. Wish I had thought of this one.
This is a long, but excellent report. [...] It hurts me a little to have so little criticism of a manuscript.
More seriously, the Top 20 Reasons (Negative Comments) Written by the Reviewers Recommending Rejection of 123 Medical Education Manuscripts can be found at Academic Medicine (vol 76, no . 9 / 2 0 0 1). The top 5 is:
Statistics: inappropriate, incomplete, or insufficiently described, etc. 11.2 %
Overinterpretation of the results 8.7 %
Inappropriate, suboptimal, insufficiently described instrument 7.3%
Sample too small or biased 5.6 %
Text difficult to follow, to understand 3.9%
Neuroskeptic describes 9 types of review decisions in the The Wheel of Peer Review. Was your paper reviewed by “Bee-in-your-Bonnet” or by “Cite Me, Me, Me!”
The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so very profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them.
Responses to a rejection are also of all ages. See this video anno 1945 (yes this scene has been used tons of times for other purposes)
Yet if you are still unsuccessful and want a definitive decision rendered within hours of submission you can always send your paper to the Journal of Universal Rejection.
Text with the video: As a doctor half the battle is figuring out if your patients are actually doing what you tell them. Here’s a prime example where Dr. House is trying so hard to be nice for the holidays….
If you’re looking for more serious posts on the matter, please see Allergynotes, another blog of Ves Dimov.
And House is also on the Dutch t.v. My daughter told me it is even one of her favorite series. I wouldn’t know, it was the first time I saw House. Most of my evenings are filled with Twitter, blogging or sports.
This picture is so cool.
First seen at ScienceRoll of Bertalan Mesko (@berci); this print is from a T-shirt of Zazzle.
More t-shirts and other prictures can be seen here
Sarah Palin again, but now an interview with John Cleese about her, or is it about parrots?
I was first tipped by Bercalan Mesko (scienceroll) on Twitter (@Berci), but I found a shorter version on You Tube that I preferred (without another comedian, Cleese will do).
Both versions I later found on…… Dr Shock’s weblog again. He wrote that the you tube video’s originated from the CleeseBlog. Interesting to follow I suppose. The longer version is also on youtube.
An extra one, again from Gerard on another celebrity. http://tinyurl.com/59moz7. LOL! Added Wednesday November 5th, the day that Obama became president of the US.
McCain and Palin Sing (by Henry Hey) (hattip @berci)
Funny Obama Song with a guest performance of Hillary
And many, many more Obama video’s on You Tube. I won’t show them all, but you can look at “related video’s. This is one about Barrack Obama funny Pictures and quotes, using the same music as 8.
@gbierens referred to a comic strip in a Dutch local newspaper (ED). Obama pays for a drink and leaves the bar. Bartender: “Hey, Obama, don’t you want change?
The recent Google Doc spam attack made me think of the video my daughter (14) recently showed me. She gave me the link to ongein.nl, but I found a better version on Youtube, that can be enbedded.
It is Animator vs. Animation 2 by Alan Becker
Enjoy it! Watch it till the END. Lol firefox!
——–
Dit spreekt voor zich. Een hele leuke animatie, waar mijn dochter me een tijd geleden op attendeerde Ik moest er weer aan denken nadat ik eergisteren zo’n vervelende spam binnenkreeg. Het begin is wat traag, maar daarna gebeurt er zoveel. Ik zie er steeds meer in. Vooral firefox is prachtig, maar ook The END. Herkenbaar. Geniet ervan!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=116da832-aed5-4e5f-950e-79fb88c6a13e)
Recent Comments