bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2021‒05‒30
sixteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society

  1. Circulation. 2021 May 25. CIRCULATIONAHA121055393
      Statistical analyses are a crucial component of the biomedical research process and are necessary to draw inferences from biomedical research data. The application of sound statistical methodology is a prerequisite for publication in the American Heart Association (AHA) journal portfolio. The objective of this document is to summarize key aspects of statistical reporting that might be most relevant to the authors, reviewers, and readership of AHA journals. The AHA Scientific Publication Committee convened a task force to inventory existing statistical standards for publication in biomedical journals and to identify approaches suitable for the AHA journal portfolio. The experts on the task force were selected by the AHA Scientific Publication Committee, who identified 12 key topics that serve as the section headers for this document. For each topic, the members of the writing group identified relevant references and evaluated them as a resource to make the standards summarized herein. Each section was independently reviewed by an expert reviewer who was not part of the task force. Expert reviewers were also permitted to comment on other sections if they chose. Differences of opinion were adjudicated by consensus. The standards presented in this report are intended to serve as a guide for high-quality reporting of statistical analyses methods and results.
    Keywords:  biostatistics
  2. STAR Protoc. 2021 Jun 18. 2(2): 100468
      A guiding principle of STAR Protocols is that we make researchers' lives easier by publishing robust and usable protocols. We leverage the strength of peer review to help authors improve their protocol. This Backstory details the transformation of a bench protocol to a published protocol, highlighting the improvements to the article through the drafting, review, and revision stages. This underscores the value of the peer review process in general and the collaborative peer review philosophy at STAR Protocols specifically. For complete details, please refer to Chhoy et al. (2021).
  3. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2021 May 27. 281 342-346
      For many decades English language was dominant in international scientific communications, but during the last decade it threatens to become the only language for communicating medical science at international level. The aim of this article was to make an overview of publication practices in regard to language of publication of MEDLINE-referenced articles from European countries in year 2020. Scientific publications referenced in MEDLINE database during year 2020 were chosen for analysis. The inclusion criteria were publications affiliated with one of European countries, published in either English or national languages of those countries. The countries with less than 100.000 inhabitants were excluded from the study. Only 11 of 38 European countries had any number of medical publications in national language that were referenced in MEDLINE; the authors from twenty-seven European countries completely stopped publishing in national language at international journals. While economic strenght of a country was strongly correlated with number of international publications per 100.000 inhabitants, the correlation with international papers published in national languages was much less pronounced. Researchers from majority of European countries are publishing their studies predominantly or only in international medical journals printed in English language. Additional efforts should be made in the future to promote publishing in national languages.
    Keywords:  English language; Europe; International medical journals; national language
  4. Nature. 2021 May 27.
    Keywords:  Computer science; Ethics; Publishing; Research data
  5. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2021 May 25. pii: S1701-2163(21)00417-5. [Epub ahead of print]
      A retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate open-access journals in obstetrics and gynaecology, published between 2011 and 2019. Journals were classified based on their registration in open-access journal directories. Of 176 journals, 47 were not registered. Journals registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) demonstrated good overall quality, and their journal metrics were significantly higher than those of non-registered journals or journals registered in other directories. The lack of editor names and indexing information on a journal's website are the most distinctive features of non-registered journals. Non-registration in an open-access journal directory indicates a lack of transparency and may ultimately indicate that a journal is predatory.
    Keywords:  obstetrics and gynecology; open-access; predatory
  6. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2021 May 23. 1-8
      Purpose: There are currently no available aids for authors when selecting ophthalmology journals to submit their manuscripts. We aim to provide comprehensive data on the duration from submission to various stages of the publication process and assess factors influencing time to publication in ophthalmology journals.Methods: A list of ophthalmology journals was obtained from the 2019 Web of Science Journal Citation Report. Journal characteristics, such as five-year impact factor, number of authors per article, journal type, and number of multi-institutional articles, were collected. The dates of submission, acceptance, electronic and print publication for all articles published in an ophthalmology journal in 2019 were determined.Results: In total, 56 journals and 8835 research articles were included. Of these articles, 3591 (40.6%) were open access and 4837 (54.7%) were multi-institutional. In 2019, most publications came from the United States of America (n = 1973), China (n = 1069) and Germany (n = 602). Significant associations were found between various predictors and a reduced mean number of days from submission to electronic publication: increased journal five-year impact factor (p = .026), more authors (p = .028), publishing in a hybrid journal (both open-access and subscription articles) versus an open-access journal (p = .021), and a reduced proportion of multi-institutional articles in a journal (p = .030).Conclusions: There is a wide variation in the time to acceptance and publication in ophthalmology journals. Authors can expect a shorter time to publication when publishing in high-impact journals.
    Keywords:  Ophthalmology; bibliometrics; publication time; research impact
  7. Clin Teach. 2021 May 28.
      BACKGROUND: In recent years, the field of medical education has sought to amplify the voices of those from traditionally marginalised groups and medical education journals have sought to become more accessible and diverse. This study sought to examine the gender and geographical representation of editors and editorial board members in medical education journals.METHODS: Information about individual editors and editorial board members of 10 medical education journals was retrieved from their websites in January 2021, including their gender and the country in which they were based. Countries were categorised according to World Bank Income Classification and World Bank Geographical Regions. We then calculated the Composite Editorial Board Diversity Score for each journal.
    FINDINGS: Of 488 editors and editorial board members, 283 (58.0%) were male, 452 (92.6%) were based in high-income countries and 322 (66.0%) were from the four countries with greatest representation (the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada).
    DISCUSSION: The composition of medical education journals' editorial leadership teams remains dominated by males and those from higher income and Western countries. Strikingly, little change has taken place since this was last examined 17 years ago despite the field becoming apparently more globalised. As medical education strives to become a more inclusive and diverse discipline, developing policies to create more globally representative editorial leadership teams should now be an urgent priority.
  8. Nature. 2021 May;593(7860): S2-S3
    Keywords:  Funding; Government; Institutions; Politics; Publishing
  9. Nature. 2021 May;593(7860): S4-S5
    Keywords:  Funding; Government; Institutions; Politics; Publishing
  10. J Thromb Haemost. 2021 Jun;19(6): 1589-1590
    Keywords:  evidence generation; meta-analyses; redundancy; research wastage; scientific publication