{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023509655751469353, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005037783375314861, 'mean_word_length': 4.786407766990291, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Editorial 'autonomy ' in learned journals: lessons from the CMAJ episode.

When John Hoey returned from vacation on February 20, 2006 he did not look over his shoulder; a pink slip was delivered to him that afternoon. A normal practice in the West that hardly makes news. But the sacking of Hoey triggered a furore in medical journals as he happened to be the Editor-in-Chief of the widely respected Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) . For good measure, his deputy Anne Marie Todkill was also shown the door. In an unprecedented move, the editor and his senior deputy editor were sacked without notice. The firing of two editors of a prestigious medical journal attracted tremendous outrage, criticism and debate. Editors the world over swung into action with overwhelming support to their sacked colleagues and the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) was taken to task for this ill advised move . The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) also came out in strong support of the sacked editors . After all, Hoey and Todkill were respected, courageous and professional editors unafraid of speaking their mind against the establishment which they did with unfail ing regularity.