RT @LucaBartoliniMD: Calling #neurology #artists for an opportunity to have your art featured on the cover of Neurology Clinical Practice.….

Dear reviewers who remind authors that data is a plural noun: you have my whole heart.

Has anyone noticed how many studies using the UK Biobank only include white participants for the sake of "homogeneity"? It makes non-white people in the UK invisible to researchers, and I worry about the message it sends to non-white people about their value in research.

Surprised at how much trouble I'm having finding this: can anyone recommend an article that summarizes how the various neuromodulation devices actually work? I have found so many hand-wavy descriptions.

I grew up in Petersham and I'm so happy to see the record set straight for posterity here!.

This could have been an important and useful finding on a timely topic in a population that really needs better support, with clearly described methods and results. Hard to see how lack of publishing helps anyone at this point. 4/end.

One reason given for not getting IRB approval? "We weren't planning to publish this". Subsequent answers about consent contradict previous tweets. It's now very unclear whether any of this was either legal or ethical. 3/.

Immediately, the Twitterverse wanted to know why they didn't get IRB approval and why they didn't get informed consent. Especially because the thread reports that users (who have mental health concerns!) felt negatively about use of the AI. 2/.

Call me old fashioned, but I really believe in the old fashioned system of using published papers to communicate scientific process and results. This thread describes an experiment using AI to guide chat responses on an app for mental health support. 1/.

I had so much fun talking to @headacheMD for this podcast, in which I geek out about Altmetric scores, my favorite headache papers in @GreenJournal, and what we look for in headache research submissions. And of course, a plug for peer review!.

And kudos both to Dana Turner for such clear and concise writing, and to @HeadacheJournal for continuing their leadership in highlighting the importance of reporting standards and guidelines.

This is a must read for neurology researchers in every subspecialty, not just headache! I see these reporting issues constantly in papers submitted to Neurology. They're easy to fix and doing so increases the chances of your paper being viewed favorably.

This is a groundbreaking paper and it was such a pleasure to listen to Drs. Tietjen and Pace highlight why. Stay tuned for a whole series of headache-related Neurology Video Journal Clubs in the upcoming weeks!.

I strongly encourage using a phrase such as "This paper would benefit from a closer review for English grammar and flow", which says the same thing without making assumptions.

Many peer reviews I read include a phrase like "This paper would benefit from review by a native English speaker". Occasionally this is said by a non-native speaker to a native speaker, which highlights the problem with the phrase: native speaking is not the same as mastery.

I'm just going to say this again: When there are four authors and the first two are co-first and the last two are co-senior, it's a sign that author order is not a helpful metric anymore. Academia needs to find another way to recognize the hard work that all researchers do!.

This conference is a true hybrid! I'm moderating a conference in Scottsdale via Zoom from my home office in Boston. The view backstage:

If you can't join now, look out for the replay available within a few days. I'm happy that the organizers are making on demand available for this conference. Every talk looks great and there are so many of them! #AHSAZ21.

RT @tsaiduck77: Share WIDELY: @JAMA_current is searching for a new Editor in Chief. Being on the Selection Committee has been so eye-openin….

Using respectful words is such a low bar. Our job as doctors and researchers is to improve people's health. How are we going to that while deliberately using words that cause pain? I am never going to understand the vehement arguments in favor of knowingly hurting other people.