No subject

Sun Dec 12 18:29:16 UTC 2010

2. The creation of some basic guidelines on preparing/publishing
additional (supplementary) files. Comprehensive information on "what do
we mean by data?" wasn't deemed necessary (or possible) but some basic
principles might be useful e.g. supplementary tables should not be
provided as PDF files.

> It seems like this paper is perhaps unfairly putting the burden of
> responsibility on the authors of meta-analyses, rather than on
> publishers who I imagine could easily (surely?) let ISI count ESM/SI
> citations. Why does this issue even exist in 2011 (the Digitial
> Age)!?!?

One would think so - are there any publishers on the list who wouldn't
mind giving their perspective or explaining the challenges?

Jenny