[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
November 28, 1990

The AMA Specialty Journals: Everyone, Including Grunts, Squeals Unfair

Author Affiliations

Rochester, NY

Rochester, NY

JAMA. 1990;264(20):2626-2627. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03450200034023

To the Editor.—  The editorial1 concerning the distribution and readership of AMA specialty journals deserves comment.The statement "they [the most widely read medical publications] were tabloids and specialty magazines that are produced strictly for profit and contribute little or nothing to the body of medical knowledge" is open to question. In the field of ophthalmology, both the Ophthalmology Times and Ocular Surgery News are appreciated sources of up-to-date information on a variety of subjects pertinent to the practice of that specialty. It is assumed that the readers of these publications are capable of separating the wheat from the chaff. Peer-reviewed journals deserve a similar cautious approach on the part of the reader. It has been well publicized that articles have appeared in worthy scientific journals that were based on scientific fraud.Because of both circulation and readership problems, it is now proposed to "add the balance of virtually