Journal of ENT Masterclass
The Eleventh Journal of ENT Masterclass® was published in January 2019 with 17 review articles on current ENT topics from national and international authors. This has been published as an e-journal and you are welcome download your copy. The last ten journals are available free from our website in electronic format. After producing seven annual journals for an International Audience, Prof Patrick Bradley has handed over the reins to Mr Hesham Saleh as the Chairman of the Editorial Board.
The Journal of ENT Masterclass is now officially accredited by ENT-UK for their members and Prof Nirmal Kumar (Secratary, ENT-UK) is their representative on the editorial board. We are honoured to have two new members to the Editorial board, Prof Shusheng Gong and Prof Zhiqiang Gao from Beijing.
The current Editorial board is:
Chairman Editorial Board : Mr Hesham Saleh (UK)
Otology: Mr Richard D Irving (UK)
Rhinology/ Facial Plastics: Mr Shahz Ahmed (UK)
Paediatrics: Mr Michael Kuo (UK)
Head & Neck: Mr Ricard Simo (UK)
Prof Musheer Hussain (UK), Prof J P O?Neill (Ireland), Prof. Tony Narula (UK), Prof. Shak Saeed (UK), Mr. James England (UK), Prof. Alok Thakar (India), Prof. Deepak Mehta (USA), Prof Mumtaz Khan (Pak), Dr Carsten Palme (Australia), Prof. Oliver Kaschke (Germany), Dr Faruque Riffat (Australia), Prof Nirmal Kumar (ENT-UK), Mr Amit Prasai (UK) Prof Shusheng Gong (China) Prof Zhiqiang Gao (China)
Managing Editor: Mr M S Quraishi (UK)
Emeritus Editor: Prof Patrick Bradley (UK)
ENT Master Class Ltd: 106 Nottingham Road, Ravenshead, Nottingham NG15 9HL England
Managing Editor: Mr M S Quraishi (Nottingham, UK) Has over 20 years publishing experience as editor in Medical school and 8 years at Journal of ENT Masterclass. Has authored about 45 clinical articles and 5 book chapters.
Chairman: Mr Hesham Saleh (London, UK) Has been member of the Editorial board for 8 years and has authored over 40 clinical articles.
Link for Author Guidelines
Conflict of interest:
All authors must submit a signed declaration of any conflicts of interest directly or indirectly with the manuscript to the Editors. The editorial board shall have the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript based on the declaration.
Contents of manuscripts must comply with international laws regulating research and testing on animals and local laws.
Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 & 2013 UK
Guidelines on the handling and care of animals in research
Whilst the authors local Research Ethics Committee?s terms of reference may refer only to research carried out with human participants, any research carried out that involves the observation and handling of an animal, bird or insect in field research in the wild must be shown to adhere to guidelines as set out by professional bodies.
Useful reference material:?
Material submitted for publication should comply with all international and local human rights legislation including current UK laws. The Editorial board shall have the final decision.
Ethical standards for research involving human participants
1. The integrity of any research depends not only on its scientific rigour, but also on its ethical adequacy. While some issues are specific to professional groups, all research should be guided by a set of fundamental ethical principles to ensure the protection of human participants.
Underpinning the standards are the ethical imperatives of DO NO HARM (nonmaleficience) and DO GOOD (beneficience).
2. No research should cause harm, and preferably it should benefit participants. Procedures must be justified, explaining why alternative approaches involving less risk cannot be used. The potential benefits of the research to participants, the scientific community and/or society must be clearly stated. Any cultural, religious, gender or other differences in a research population should be sensitively and appropriately handled by researchers at all stages.
3. Potential participants normally have the right to receive clearly communicated information from the researcher in advance. The information sheet should set out: the purpose of the investigation; the procedures; the risks (including psychological distress); the benefits, or absence of them, to the individual or to others in the future or to society; a statement that individuals may decline to participate and also will be free to withdraw at any time without giving a reason; and an invitation to ask questions.
4. Honesty should be central to the relationship between researcher, participant and institutional representatives.
5. Participants? confidentiality and anonymity should be maintained. All information obtained in the course of a research project should be considered privileged information and should under no circumstances be publicly disclosed in a fashion that would identify any individual or organisation.
6. The collection and storage of research data by researchers must comply with the local Data Protection Acts (1998, UK). Participants must be informed of the kinds of personal information which will be collected, what will be done with it, and to whom it will be disclosed. ?Consent to process? may need to be obtained where information collected from individuals is to be used later for research purposes.
7. Researchers have a duty to disseminate their research findings to all appropriate parties
Guidelines for informed consent
1. Participants in a research study have the right to give their informed consent before participating. Participants should understand the purpose and nature of the study, what participation in the study requires, and what benefits are intended to result from the study.
Voluntary informed consent, in writing, should usually be obtained from any participant who is able to give such consent. Consent may be implied by the completion and return of many social survey questionnaires, removing the need for written consent.
2. Participants should be free from coercion of any kind and should not be pressured to participate in a study.
3. Where third parties are affected by the research, informal consent should be obtained.
4. The consent of vulnerable participants or their representatives? permission should be actively sought by researchers. If the involvement of children in a research study is justified, then parents or other legal guardians have the right to be informed and to give their assent for inclusion of the child in the study. Generally, children over age 16 may be assumed to be capable of giving informed consent, but this will vary depending on the nature of research and special guidance may need to be sought.
Peer review process:
After submission, the Editors review the manuscript to make sure it fits both the journal's subject matter and it?s editorial objectives.
The editor then forwards the paper to a team of reviewers (normally 3) from the list of reviewers registered with the Journal. They read it closely and provide individual reports, usually within four weeks.
In their report, they:
Comment on the validity of the science, identifying scientific errors.
Evaluate the design and strength of the methodology used.
Judge the scientific or clinical significance by evaluating the importance of the findings.
Determine the originality of the work.
Reviewers also check the references for accuracy.
They then recommend that the paper is to be published (with or without further clarification) or rejected. Editors don't have to heed this recommendation, but may seek further information from the reviewers. The approach for peer review is mostly modelled on single-blind review, with plans to adopt open peer review methods possibly in the future.
Peer review panel:
Prof A A Narula (London), Mr Dave Salvadurai (London), Ms Mr A Bhattacharrya (London), Mr M S Quraishi (Doncaster), Mr Rahul Kanegaonkar (Kent), Mr Khalid Ghafoor (London), Mr Shahz Ahmed (Birmingham), Richard Hewitt (London), Kay Seymour (London), Mr Ricard Simo (London) Ricard Simo (London), Jeremy Davis (Surrey), Richard Oakley (London) Claire Hopkins (London), Mr Y Bajjaj (London) Daniel Tweedie (London) Mr Michael Kuo, Consultant, Birmingham, UK, Prof Dan Jiang, Consultant, London, UK, Mr S S Musheer Hussain, Consultant, Dundee, UK, Mr Richard Irving, Consultant, Birmingham, UK, Mr Gerry Reilly, Consultant, York, UK, Prof Shak R Saeed, Consultant, London, UK, Prof Anshul Sama, Consultant, Nottingham, UK, Mr Hesham Saleh, Consultant, London, UK, Mr Tim Woolford, Consultant, Manchester, UK, Mr Sean Carrie, Consultant, Newcastle, UK, Mr Abir Battacharya, Consultant, London, UK Mr Tim Mitchell, Consultant, Southampton, UK Prof Mumtaz J Khan, Consultant, Karachi, Pakistan, Prof Javier Gavilan, Consutant, Madrid, Spain, Prof Carsten Palme, Consultant, Sydney, Australia, Mr Faruque Riffat, Consultant, Sydney, Australia, Mr Nigel Beasley, Consultant, Nottingham, UK, Prof Patrick Bradley, Emeritus Professor, Nottingham, UK, Mr Vin Paleri, Consultant, Newcastle, UK, Dr Andy Norris, Consultant Anaesthetist, Nottingham, UK, Prof Oliver Kaschke, Consultant, Berlin, Germany, Dr Bernie, Foran, Consultant, Sheffield, UK, Mr Mark Watson, Consultant, Doncaster, UK, Mr M Shahed Quraishi, Consultant, Doncaster, UK
The Journal of ENT Masterclass has recently published its 9th Annual Edition. ENT Masterclass is pleased to announce the plan to offer a Limited Edition of: 'The ENT Masterclass Revision Textbook' by compiling five editions together. This will consist of over 125 high quality current topics (approx 712 pages) by leading International experts which covers almost the entire curriculum for higher surgical trainees and for clinicians as an instant update.
From the feedback that we have had from trainees it appears to be a very popular aid for revision for the various exams. Some calling it the 'perfect revision topics'.
The above textbook is currently not available.