[AAHM_Clio_Project] Summer writing?

[Jeremy Greene]

Thanks for sending this along, David.

Let me add my own voice of encouragement here: I have had almost as many prospective NEJM Perspectives rejected as accepted, including two of the last three pieces I have submitted.  I think my overall batting record with NEJM is close to .600.  This is to say, even if your first or even second piece is rejected, it's worth trying again.  The editorial board is inscrutable, but they do appreciate the value historical of essays, as long as your writing can demonstrate the timeliness and relevance of the subject at hand.

To underline David's point: it is an unusual and quite fortunate occurrence that the NEJM editorial board is so sympathetic to the goals of the Clio Initiative:  communicating the relevance of historical analysis in contemporary medical education, practice, research, and health policy.  The opportunity is open to all of us.  Along with David, I'm happy to talk with any of you about the process of writing meaningful history in 1200 words with 5 refs.  It's not easy, but it can be highly rewarding.

All best,

Jeremy

Jeremy A. Greene, MD, PhD
Associate Professor of Medicine and the History of Medicine
Elizabeth Treide and A. McGehee Harvey Chair in the History of Medicine
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine


From: <Jones>, David Jones <dsjones at harvard.edu<mailto:dsjones at harvard.edu>>
Date: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:09 AM
To: "aahm_clio_project at histmed.org<mailto:aahm_clio_project at histmed.org>" <aahm_clio_project at histmed.org<mailto:aahm_clio_project at histmed.org>>
Subject: [AAHM_Clio_Project] Summer writing?


As I've said before, NEJM is actively interested in publishing historical perspectives (and for a mix of reasons they seem to be more interested now than usual).  If you have ideas about good ones, please think seriously about submitting them.  They are most interested in historical perspectives on issues of immediate relevance to current practice or policy, or in historical reflections on important anniversaries of articles from their archive or about important milestones.  e.g., the 2012 Greene and Podolsky piece about the 50th anniversary of the 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendments, or an upcoming piece about the 50th anniversary of Beecher's 1966 expose about unethical research.

It can be hard to write history in 1200 words with 5 refs, but it is possible.  They will sometimes make exceptions and allow more references, but only to articles from their own archive.  Although NEJM has a very high rejection rate, historians have done better than average: I think the acceptance rate for history perspectives is > 50%.

I'm happy to offer my thoughts on whatever ideas or drafts you might have, with the caveat that I still have only imperfect insight into their interests and tolerances.  I've been able to help some authors tailor their pieces before submission, which has improved the odds of acceptance.

I think it is important for historians of medicine to take advantage of this opportunity to spread the word about our work - the editor, Jeff Drazen, is quite interested in history, and that's something that doesn't happen often.

Happy brainstorming,

David.

David S. Jones, M.D., Ph.D.
A. Bernard Ackerman Professor of the Culture of Medicine
Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the Faculty of Medicine
Harvard University

_______________________________________________
AAHM_Clio_Project mailing list
AAHM_Clio_Project at histmed.org<mailto:AAHM_Clio_Project at histmed.org>
http://histmed.org/mailman/listinfo/aahm_clio_project_histmed.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://histmed.org/pipermail/aahm_clio_project_histmed.org/attachments/20150529/13e57a5a/attachment.html>