bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2022‒01‒23
nineteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society

  1. Account Res. 2022 Jan 17.
      Delving into the review reports, this paper is aimed at analyzing reviewers` attitudes toward different sections of the manuscripts they review. The research focuses on the consistency of reviewers` evaluation through analysis of their assessment of separate parts of a paper, if it corresponds with the recommendations they made to the editors and whether a paper needs revision or should be accepted/rejected. It is assumed that the assessment of separate parts of a paper should be consistent with the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript. Based on the analysis presented in this paper it can be concluded that the assessments of separate parts of articles in the evaluation sheets do not fully reflect the final recommendations of the reviewers. The results showed that the most correlated and therefore the most significant sections for the reviewers are the main text and the conclusions. The conditional probability analysis showed that the decision of reviewers, when number of points in the evaluation sheet is taken into consideration, is slightly unpredictable. No significant differences in the reviewers` recommendations based on gender or country of origin of the reviewers were found.
    Keywords:  evaluation sheet; peer review; probability; quality
  2. Front Res Metr Anal. 2021 ;6 767869
    Keywords:  COVID-19; Open Science; infrastructure; innovation; integrity; open access; preprint
  3. IUCrJ. 2022 Jan 01. 9(Pt 1): 1-2
      The editors discuss the submission of structural biology data.
    Keywords:  data; peer review; structural biology
  4. Med Health Care Philos. 2022 Jan 17.
      With the rapidly expanding catalogue of scientific publications, especially within the Biomedical Sciences field, it is becoming increasingly difficult for researchers to search for, read or even interpret emerging scientific findings. PubMed, just one of the current biomedical data repositories, comprises over 33 million citations for biomedical research, and over 2500 publications are added each day. To further strengthen the impact biomedical research, we suggest that there should be more synergy between publications and machines. By bringing machines into the realm of research and publication, we can greatly augment the assessment, investigation and cataloging of the biomedical literary corpus. The effective application of machine-based manuscript assessment and interpretation is now crucial, and potentially stands as the most effective way for researchers to comprehend and process the tsunami of biomedical data and literature. Many biomedical manuscripts are currently published online in poorly searchable document types, with figures and data presented in formats that are partially inaccessible to machine-based approaches. The structure and format of biomedical manuscripts should be adapted to facilitate machine-assisted interrogation of this important literary corpus. In this context, it is important to embrace the concept that biomedical scientists should also write manuscripts that can be read by machines. It is likely that an enhanced human-machine synergy in reading biomedical publications will greatly enhance biomedical data retrieval and reveal novel insights into complex datasets.
    Keywords:  Interoperability; Machine; Open access; Reproducibility; Research
  5. PLoS One. 2022 ;17(1): e0261881
      OBJECTIVE: To assess the pattern of instructions regarding the ethical requirements given to authors in various Pediatric Dental Journals.MATERIAL & METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 'instructions for authors,' for analysis of guidelines on ethical processes, was done. Instructions to authors in journals of pediatric dentistry across the globe were reviewed for guidelines with regards to fourteen key ethical issues. Descriptive statistics were used, and results were expressed in percentages as well as numbers.
    RESULTS: Of the 18journals of pediatric dentistry, all 14 ethical issues were covered by the instructions to authors in only three journals with only 50% of these providing clarity about authorship using ICMJE guidelines. Furthermore, COI declaration was found to be present as mandatory in about 44% of the journals. 38.9% of the sampled journals mentioned guidelines on research misconduct, publication issues such as plagiarism, overlapping/fragmented publications, and availability of raw research data from authors. Guidelines on handling of complaints about editorial team was provided to authors by slightly over 33% of the selected pediatric dentistry titles while handling of complaints about authors and reviewers were mentioned in 16.7%and 55.6% of the journals respectively.
    CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of Journals of Pediatric Dentistry did not provide adequate instructions to authors regarding ethical issues.
  6. Nature. 2022 Jan 21.
    Keywords:  Peer review; SARS-CoV-2; Virology
  7. Recenti Prog Med. 2022 Jan;113(1): 9-11
      Ten years after the death of Alessandro Liberati, the authors wonder how much the principles that guided the action of the founder of the Italian Cochrane Centre are still relevant. The guiding star of Liberati's professional life was the fight for useful research aimed at solving problems relevant to patients and their families. Consistently with the work of other researchers such as Sir Iain Chalmers and Paul Glasziou - they have recently offered important contribution on these issues - Alessandro Liberati worked hard to guarantee open, accessible, and transparent research to citizens, health decision makers and health professionals. Unfortunately, his final call to design a new research governance remained unanswered. Research is still too focused on individual therapeutic interventions rather than on overall care strategies. Studies are still too often unpublished or only partially published. Research is still influenced by conflicts of interest and peer review is often biased. Much work remains to be done, to ensure that publicly funded research is guided by the real needs of citizens and patients.
  8. Curr Med Res Opin. 2022 Jan 18. 1-3
    Keywords:  COVID-19; medical writing; peer review; preprints
  9. BMJ Open Sci. 2021 ;5(1): e100188
      Objectives: To study the experiences and views within the health science community regarding the spread and prevention of science misinformation within and beyond the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: An exploratory study with an empirical ethics approach using qualitative interviews with Australians who produce, communicate and study health science research.
    Results: Key elements that participants considered might facilitate misinformation included: the production of low-quality, fraudulent or biased science research; inadequate public access to high-quality research; insufficient public reading of high-quality research. Strategies to reduce or prevent misinformation could come from within the academic community, academic and lay media publishing systems, government funders and educators of the general public. Recommended solutions from within the scientific community included: rewarding research translation, encouraging standardised study design, increasing use of automated quality assessment tools, mandating study protocol registration, transparent peer review, facilitating wider use of open access and use of newer technologies to target public audiences. There was disagreement over whether preprints were part of the problem or part of the solution.
    Conclusions: There is concern from within the health science community about systemic failings that might facilitate the production and spread of false or misleading science information. We advocate for further research into ways to minimise the production and spread of misinformation about COVID-19 and other science crises in the future.
    Keywords:  meta research; misinformation; qualitative research; science communication
  10. BMC Res Notes. 2022 Jan 21. 15(1): 20
      Research data management (RDM) is the cornerstone of a successful research project, and yet it often remains an underappreciated art that gets overlooked in the hustle and bustle of everyday project management even when required by funding bodies. If researchers are to strive for reproducible science that adheres to the principles of FAIR, then they need to manage the data associated with their research projects effectively. It is imperative to plan your RDM strategies early on, and setup your project organisation before embarking on the work. There are several different factors to consider: data management plans, data organisation and storage, publishing and sharing your data, ensuring reproducibility and adhering to data standards. Additionally it is important to reflect upon the ethical implications that might need to be planned for, and adverse issues that may need a mitigation strategy. This short article discusses these different areas, noting some best practices and detailing how to incorporate these strategies into your work. Finally, the article ends with a set of top ten tips for effective research data management.
    Keywords:  Data ethics; Data management plans; Data organisation; Data sharing; FAIR data; Reproducibility; Research data management
  11. World J Diabetes. 2021 Dec 15. 12(12): 1969-1978
      The 2021 online editorial board meeting of the World Journal of Diabetes (WJD) was held on November 9, 2021. Jin-Lei Wang, General Manager on behalf of the Baishideng Publishing Group, and Professor Islam, one of the Editors-in-Chiefs (EiCs) of the WJD, organized the meeting. Three EiCs and 18 Baishideng Publishing Group staff attended the meeting. The meeting goal was to brief the EiCs on the journal's performance, discuss the issues of concern of the EiCs, and gather ideas for the journal's development in 2022. As of November 8, the WJD had received 287 manuscripts since the year's start, among which 122 met the criteria for publication. These numbers represent an increase of 117.4% for submissions and 110.3% for publications compared to those in 2020. However, how to effectively control the academic quality of manuscripts and attract high-quality original article submissions remain a challenge. The EiCs provided feedback and suggestions centered on three topics: (1) Who should and how to control the academic quality of the manuscripts; (2) How the EiCs perform their responsibilities; and (3) The distinctive and shared responsibilities of the publisher and the EiCs.
    Keywords:  Baishideng; Bibliometrics; Editorial board meeting; Journal development; Scientific literature; World Journal of Diabetes
  12. Biophys Rev. 2021 Dec;13(6): 813-814
      This Commentary describes some upcoming changes to the submission and payment procedures to the Biophysical Society of Japan's English language journal "Biophysics and Physicobiology" (BPPB) that will facilitate a much easier and cheaper publishing experience for all scientists-whether they be Japan-based or located internationally.
  13. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2022 Jan;21(1): 3