MESSAGE FROM THE CHANCELLOR

In Praise of Scientific and Clinical Writing…And Reading

You are engaged, at this very moment, in an activity that is becoming increasingly rare. You are seated somewhere with a periodical held in your hands and you are reading words transmitted to you by the technology of paper, ink and the U.S. Postal Service. In contrast, nowadays people increasingly derive information from social media, blogs, online news sources or TED Talks, which are no more than 15 minutes lest they be considered an imposition on your attention span. The price of this rapid-fire transmission of information is that we are at risk of people losing the capacity to create and present a sustained data-driven logical argument and, equally important, that we may be losing the capacity to read or listen to such an argument and judge its validity. In the face of the onslaught of 280-character tweets and sound bites, once a year the librarians of the New York Medical College (NYMC) Health Sciences Library painstakingly compile a record of the authorship of journal articles in the peer-reviewed biomedical literature by the faculty, the names and numbers of the books they have authored, the number of times these scholarly works are referenced by others and their impact. At the 28th Annual Faculty Author Celebration and Awards Ceremony, the full 2020 tally was presented: NYMC generated 747 articles, four books and 55 book chapters from 411 individual authors amongst our faculty. Ninety-four of the articles published were related to COVID-19.

Among the most cited and highest impact journal publications of the faculty were “Survival and Right Ventricular Function After Surgical Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism” in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology; “A Randomized Trial of Erythropoietin for Neuroprotection in Preterm Infants” in The New England Journal of Medicine; “A Guide for Urogynecologic Patient Care Utilizing Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Review of Existing Evidence” in Obstetrics and Gynecology; and “Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in U.S. Children and Adolescents” in Pediatrics.

And what are we to make of these numbers and these titles? First, there is a special place in heaven reserved for librarians who collect and collate data of this type. Second, each individual published journal article represents painstaking hypothesisgeneration; laboratory experiments, population research or clinical trials conducted; the compilation and statistical analysis of data; drawing conclusions; and presenting a sustained written argument—all then subjected to the extremely critical review of multiple acknowledged content experts who decide if the proposed article is worthy to be published in a peer-reviewed biomedical journal. Each article will range from 1,500 to 10,000 words. I, like many biomedical researchers, can testify that any individually published paper may be the result of more than five years of work. At the end of the day, however, you are not much of a professor unless you have something worthwhile to profess. The creme-de-la-creme of all these publications are read over and over, emailed, photocopied and discussed at journal clubs as people consider their implications. The inflexible rule of science is then applied: Are these reported results reliable and reproducible? Are they confirmed by others? Is the science unimpeachable? At the end of the arduous process new knowledge is generated and the needle of biomedical science and clinical care is edged forward another click on the dial of progress. If the science is not written up, reported and the information disseminated, then nothing has been accomplished. Two of the articles, listed above, have already had a major impact on patient care during the pandemic. Recently, I had to deal with a personal illness wherein I needed to understand what the best available evidence was to determine the correct dose of hyperbaric oxygen for my condition. An afternoon spent reading the relevant articles, book chapters and review articles identified what was known about the topic and informed my decision about the treatment I would agree to take. Studying the scientific literature was the antithesis of tweets, sound bites and web postings—and far more valuable. Third, the generation, conservation and dissemination of new knowledge by biomedical research is expensive and timeconsuming. It is financially supported by the College through federal, industrial and foundation research grants, as well as philanthropically with gifts by alumni and friends of the College. It must, however, be nurtured and paid for. Research, along with clinical care and service, is one of the three legs of the metaphorical stool upon which the foundation of higher education sits.

Finally, quietly, contemplatively and unhurriedly, reading a journal article in your professional area of interest can also provide great personal pleasure. There is the thrill of learning something you did not know. There can also be the revelation of thinking you knew something only to be disabused of that belief by reading a newly published contribution to the literature of science, public health or clinical care. I trust that, as part of the NYMC community, you take as much pride in the scholarly contributions of the faculty and students of this institution as I do in reporting them to you—and that for all of us, there continues to be the pleasure of some quiet time, a comfortable chair and a worthwhile new article to read.

Edward C. Halperin, m.d., m.a. chancellor and chief executive officer