Does case reports count as publication for faculty promotion for medical teachers according to Medical Council of India (MCI) guidelines?
No definition of what type of paper is a publication is given in MCI guidelines (1. Medical Council of India. Minimum Qualifications for Teachers in Medical Institutions Regulations, 1998 (AMENDED UPTO NOVEMBER, 2010), available from: http://health.bih.nic.in/rules/teachers-eligibility-qualifications-rgulations-1998.pdf (last accessed 22 July 2015). However, the Standard Assessment Form for PG courses year 2016-2017, issued by MCI, rules out abstract and case reports as publication. Would like to know the consensus of opinion
Recently MCI has issued amendments to previous rules,only first 2 authors of original articles will be considered for promotion. Circulated go copy to all medical colleges.
Only original research articles as per mci notification in September 2015
there is also this thing that, case reports published before Aug 2013, will be counted i.e upto 4 years from 2009 Aug
Case reports can not be taken into consideration for promotion purpose from 7th September 2015 as per MCI guidelines.
Does anyone have any communication from MCI, stating as to which date the MCI recommendations of 2015 with regard publications, is applicable. Is it applicable prospectively or from 2009?
No, it cannot be considered as per MCI. Only research articles are taken into account for promotions.Even review articles are also not considered. But for individual growth all these are required.
The exact phrase is 'research publications'--some journals (indexed and reputable ones)
publish original research(study) even under the categories of 'brief communications,' and
'letters to the editor' (ref ijd and ijdvl) to accommodate more such deserving articles.These qualify going by the rules.
What type of articles do really qualify as ' original research article?'
Do case reports published during the period
before 2009 count while judging a person for the post of Professor.
Are all the rules applicable for a person who has become a Professor in 2013?
If someone can kindly clarify?
Publication policies for medical teachers: Good intentions, bad outcomes
It is said that half the time the outcome of a bad intention is good, while half the time the outcome of a good intention is bad. Hurriedly drafted publication policies by Medical Council of India (MCI), although with good intentions is resulting in bad outcome as far as quality of research and publications are concerned. This discussion critically appraises the publication policies for medical teachers framed by MCI to illustrate where they have gone astray and suggests measures to improve medical research and publication.
The publication policies framed by MCI, and too frequently amended, has to be appraised in proper context. For instance, a medical teacher has his/her plate full. In addition to teaching duties, the medical faculty is responsible for conducting OPD/OT, pre-operative and post-operative care and emergency duties. This does not leave any spare time for research and publication. To add to the difficulty, medical faculty has been trained as a professional and not as a full time researcher.
The above context is not to plead for excusing the medical faculty from carrying out research and publication. The background of his daily responsibilities has been mentioned to make a case for more realistic research output from the medical teacher.
The medical teacher should be encouraged to first take small baby steps in research and publication through incentives and not by compulsion. In daily practice the medical practitioner comes across occasionally unique cases which can provide good learning experience. These are published as case reports. Regrettably, since September 2015, case reports which are published and counted as research publication worldwide, are not counted as research publication according to the MCI amendment.[1] Case reports seen in day to day practice by the medical teacher can be published with no extra effort if encouraged by way of some research credit by MCI. As an added benefit they can inspire further research by the same faculty or others. It is strongly recommended that some credit should also be given to faculty who publish case reports in medical journals. By denying credit such rare case reports will not be published denying information to other doctors.
Another contentious issue is giving credit to only first or second author according to the September 2015 amendment, [1] and further amended to first and corresponding author in June 2017.[2] At the global level, all authors of a paper get equal credit while compiling academic merit. This is supported by the fact that while calculating the H and i10 indices of a researcher the sequence of authorship of a paper is not given any importance. The first and last authors as well as all the other authors get equal points when calculating these indices. If these are the global standards of authorship credit why has the MCI framed such stringent rules for authorship where only two authors are getting academic credit for a paper while denying credit to other researchers of the team?
The fallout of such a shortsighted policy is vitiating the academic climate in medical colleges. There is much conflict among the authors to be named first or corresponding author. This is promoting ill feeling and unhealthy competition. Cutting edge research calls for more and more interdisciplinary cooperation. Rapid advances in medical technology demand pooling of expertise of different disciplines. A team spirit is required to tackle complex medical problems. This cannot be limited to one or two authors of a paper. All authors from different disciplines irrespective of the number of authors of a research paper should get equal credit. Otherwise other authors will not give their best compromising the quality of medical research.
All authors getting equal credit will also eliminate the rat race and resulting anxiety and pressure to publish by novice authors. Equal credit can encourage them to be coauthors as an apprentice with more experienced author. This is a more realistic and honest way to start a research career. The present system promotes a number of unethical practices such as gift authorship, plagiarism and publishing in fake journals.
Another policy issue by MCI regarding publication is the indexing agencies and types of journal recommended. Firstly, let us consider the indexing agencies recommended by MCI. The following indexing agencies have got the MCI approval for publication merit of medical faculty:
· Scopus
· Embase/Excerpta Medica
· Index Copernicus
· PubMed
· Index Medicus (ceased print publication since 2004)
The first two indexing agencies are being maintained by Elsevier a commercial publisher with profit motive. Index Copernicus is also a commercial indexing agency based in Poland. One does not really understand why MCI recognizes these three indexing agencies which have commercial interest. It is like prescribing chosen brand names of medicines instead of generic names. The last two i.e. PubMed and Index Medicus (ceased print publication since 2004, shows how out of date are the MCI policy makers), are managed by the US National Library of Medicine. One again fails to understand why MCI has to recognize a US government indexing agency when we have our own national abstracting and indexing agencies such as Indian Science Abstracts, National Science Library and IndMed. This only indicates how lightly the MCI takes the Prime Minister’s call of “Make in India.”
MCI does a disservice by arbitrarily and selectively recognizing only few indexing bodies with commercial interests located in foreign countries. This is akin to prescribing brand names instead of generic names. It should also recognize such indexing and abstracting agencies such as WHO’s HINARI which strives to disseminate information about medical advances in tropical and developing countries. WHO is a globally accepted authoritative source and so its indexing and abstracting by HINARI should find a place in the MCI list of recommended indexing agencies. Similarly the indexing agency Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) which is non commercial and a mark of quality of open access journals with stringent inclusion criteria should also be included in the approved indexing bodies. The earlier policy of any indexing agency was more realistic
Other ambiguous issues in the MCI guidelines of September 2015 are specialty journal/society journal; National Journal/International Journal. Now what does MCI mean by specialty? Is it Medicine? Or does it mean journal of a particular medical specialty? Now again if it limits itself to a journal of a part specialty only, it restricts interdisciplinary research. Suppose a pathologist or a radiologist is a co-author to a paper which is published in a journal of surgical specialty will they not get credit for their work since as a pathologist or a radiologist they have not published in their specialty journal? Such ambiguities expose the medical faculty to the whims and fancies of a particular inspector.
The term “society journal” in the MCI guidelines for publication is also not clear. What is a society? A college or hospital is also a society as it brings together people with different skill sets working towards a common goal. Or does it mean “anatomical society” “radiological society” and so on. Again such vague guidelines give the MCI inspector opportunity to harass the faculty during inspections.
By these same token even the journals such as Lancet, BMJ, New England Journal of Medicine, etc, will not please a certain type of MCI inspector since they are not specialty journals nor are their affiliated to any society!!
It has been our experience that some MCI inspectors are also very cynical about bona fide journals which may be published by a particular university or college in spite of the fact that the journal may be conforming to strict international standards of journal publishing. For instance the Medical Journal of Dr DY Patil University is an international peer reviewed journal maintaining the highest standards of scientific publication. It is getting papers for publication from all parts of the globe. The author mapping of a recent issue is given in Figure 1 next page.
The other redeeming features of the journal are as follows:
(a) The International Editorial Advisory Board comprises more than 16 members from different countries globally.
(b) The National Editorial Advisory Board comprises 36 members from various prestigious institutions all over India such as AIIMS New Delhi, AIIMS Jodhpur, PGIMER Chandigarh, etc.
(c) The Journal is indexed with a large number of International Databases such as Baidu Scholar, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), EBSCO Publishing's Electronic Databases, Exlibris – Primo Central, Google Scholar, Hinari (WHO), Infotrieve, Journal Guide, National Science Library, OpenJGate, ProQuest, TdNet, Index Copernicus (ICV 2015: 86.31), Indian Science Abstracts and DOAJ.
(d) The Journal has a global pool of reviewers from over 85 countries. Out of the 3578 reviewers, 60% are from foreign countries, while 40% are from different institutions in India.
(e) Since the journal got indexed with international databases in 2012, 10% of papers authored by foreign researchers have been published in the journal.
(f) Presently about 12% of the papers under peer review has been submitted from abroad.
(g) The journal has a global readership as evidenced by letters received and published by it as “letter to the editor,” as also by the access statistics.
(h) The journal is being published by International Publishers Wolters Kluwer and Medknow publications. It provides a global platform for research. Less than 10% papers are by own faculty.
(i) A number of articles published in the journal have been cited by other journals published from abroad.
The journal’s full text is online at http://www.mjdrdypu.org. The journal does not charge for submission, processing or publishing of manuscripts. This ensures that papers are published only on merit ensured by the stringent peer review system of the journal. All the cost towards publications and maintenance of the website is borne by the University.
📷
Figure 1. Author mapping of Medical Journal of Dr DY Patil University, May-June 2017 issue.
It is strongly recommended that Indian University journals trying to maintain highest international standards, should be encouraged instead of being looked down upon. This is the way forward to ensure that the Prime Minister’s call of “Make in India” will be realized in the academic and research field.
Also the terms “National Journal” or “International Journal” does not hold true in the digital era where there is rapid dissemination of information published in a journal across globally in real time. MCI has used these terms without specifying what they mean by them.
To conclude, the MCI should have more realistic policies for publication criteria for medical teachers. The following points require consideration:
1. All types of publications such as case reports, letter to editor, editorial, review articles in addition to original articles, should get academic credit. If deemed so, they may be given lesser points than original article but not giving them any credit will discourage research among medical faculty.
2. All authors of a paper and not only first and corresponding author should get equal credit for a paper. This would promote healthy interdisciplinary collaboration.
3. Approved indexing and abstracting bodies should be expanded. At present only commercial indexes such as Scopus, Embase, Index Copernicus and US government indexing bodies are recognized by MCI. Indian indexes such as IndMed, Indian Science Abstracts, National Science Library and non commercial index such as DOAJ and WHO index such as HINARI should also be recognized by MCI.
4. Peer reviewed journals published under aegis of Indian Universities should be encouraged to promote healthy academic standards at a global level.
5. Discrimination between society/specialty/national/international journals should be eliminated. Papers published in properly indexed journal should get equal academic credit. Similarly papers published in University Journals which are properly indexed should receive equal credit.
It is also pertinent to state that recently the Human Resource Minister Shri Javadekar opined that research publication may not be necessary for university teachers’ promotion and tenure. [3] If this be so why medical teachers are having to face such stringent regulations for publications. They have other important duties such as patient care. They should publish but regulations should be more liberal to encourage genuine research.
References
1. MCI. Clarification with regard to research publication in the matter of promotion for Teaching Faculty in a medical college/institution, letter number CI-12(1)/2015-TEQ/131880 dt 03/09/2015
2. Amendment to above letter issued in June 2017, stating that only first author and corresponding author will get credit for publication.
3. http://www.hindustantimes.com/education/research-not-be-must-for-college-teachers-promotions-focus-on-community-activities-javadekar/story-qlDWhgT2EE0pWuH92iRnGO.html
For further publication dilemmas : http://www.mjdrdypv.org/article.asp?issn=2589-8302;year=2019;volume=12;issue=1;spage=1;epage=3;aulast=Banerjee
Although the answer remain NO for case report, BOG in supersession of MCI has included case series to be given credit for promotion.
You may find other related change in the table of this article : http://www.jfmpc.com/article.asp?issn=2249-4863;year=2020;volume=9;issue=6;spage=3166;epage=3167;aulast=Mondal
As per the latest MCI notification in February 2020 it is mentioned as follows:
Research publication (only original papers, meta-analysis, systematic reviews, and case series that are published in journals included in Medline, Pubmed Central, Citation index, Sciences Citation index, Expanded Embase, Scopus, Directory of Open access journals (DoAJ) will be considered).
The author must be amongst first three or should be the Corresponding author.
I agree with Rajeev Goyal
However, there is no indexing agency called "citation index" or "Expanded EMBASE"
You may have an idea from the Table of the following article:
Article Check indexing status of a journal
With warm regards,
Himel
Sir,
Could you please share the reference where it is written that case series is not accepted for promotion from asso prof to prof.
Case reports are not considered as per NMC guidelines. Kindly go through the attachment
Writing of a case report as well as a case series is an academic activity involving up-to-date knowledge and intellectual input. I believe both should be counted towards promotion if academic activity is sought as a promotion criterion by NMC.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Phytochemistry
- Extracts