Try 'co-production' and watch the meltdown!
Hi Trish, thanks for your message. Sorry to hear this has been frustrating. I checked with a member of our team who says in our scholar one submission system, authors select keywords for their paper from a preset list of MeSH terms (Medical Subject Headings www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/) . . .
That seems to imply that BMJ is not wanting to involve patients in 'their' jobs! Speaking as a lay person the optics (grinds teeth) are stunningly bad for BMJ.
Totally regressive and set against progress. Not just for this paper (which they asked for), but any new concept or discovery.
I’d also comment on this in the editorial. An example of the inverse discoverabilty law in action- restricting findability of pieces by minimising choice of key words. The opposite of what we teach students exploring the literature for the first time. Even patient involvement is in MESH.
I was commissioned for something too—winter edition?
Invent!! 😳
Yes and: “Patient” isn’t already a keyword in the bloody BMJ??? Wow.