Mind sharpeners for scientists: the EQUATOR Network.

Scientific reports should be orderly, clear, and unambiguous. Clarity is even more important for health technology assessments (HTAs), which aim at supplying reliable and up-to-date evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and cost of healthcare interventions. Increasingly assessments also provide information about the effects of technologies on organization of care, as well as relevant legal, social, and ethical considerations. Using so many angles to view technologies, assessments are elaborate pieces of scientific work. Furthermore, HTAs are produced to support policy decisions made in complex environments, amid struggles for finite resources. Evidence is weighed against a variety of stakeholder values, and in this process evidence can also be distorted. Clear reporting of research is then of crucial importance, diminishing possibilities for misunderstanding to pave the way for balanced decisions. The editors of this journal have the privilege of reading scores of research reports and other manuscripts every year. A few of the submissions are based on carefully collected and clearly reported data, analyzed with well-chosen methods, and written in flawless English. At the other end of the scale, editors struggle to find the actual study question or are appalled by lack of structure. Despite detailed guidelines for authors, surprisingly many disregard even basic technical requirements. Most submissions stand somewhere in between these extremes. An interesting topic approached inadequately is a problem; question and methods do not always match. Summarizing a full HTA report into a journal article of 4,000 words is rarely feasible, so authors should instead choose to submit a part that really merits separate publication. Writers would do well to remember that our audience is both international and multiprofessional. The most common problems are sloppy presentation and poor language. Our reviewers frequently point out flaws in tables and graphs, gaps in description of methods, or mistakes in presented results. Authors whose first language is not English have an extra hurdle. In the editorial process we support authors, of course, in many of these areas. A well-written manuscript just has a better chance of getting published. There are many excellent tools to help authors write well, and now they are accessible through one Web site.