This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on ISI (13)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship  • Alert me on articles by topic

Redefining the Relationship Between JAMA and the AMA

Huw T. O. Davies, PhD; Drummond Rennie, MD

JAMA. 1999;281:2344-2346.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The framework whereby the American Medical Association (AMA) will relate to JAMA and theArchives Journals has now been published.^1-2 These documents bring to the fore important issues of journal governance and editorial independence, issues that remain contentious. A recent editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine,³ and letters in the same issue^4-10 rebuking and supporting the editor, highlight divergent views on the extent and meaning of editorial independence for general medical journals. We now explore these issues, making the case for editorial independence and emphasizing the interrelated issues of governance and trust.

Editors hold stewardship over journals but some different body (in JAMA's case, the AMA) has privileges of ownership. Nonetheless, many other parties (readers, authors, reviewers, clinical societies—and indeed the community at large) are stakeholders with legitimate interests in the quality and relevance of the product (THE JOURNAL . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Author Affiliations: Department of Management, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife, Scotland (Dr Davies); and the Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco (Drs Davies and Rennie). Dr Rennie is a member of the JAMA Editor Search Committee.