bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2022‒04‒17
twenty papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society

  1. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022 Apr 01. pii: S1471-5953(22)00062-2. [Epub ahead of print]61 103348
  2. Science. 2022 Apr 15. 376(6590): 231-232
      Advertisements on Russian website promised to add names to articles that appeared in dozens of journals.
  3. World Neurosurg. 2022 Apr 11. pii: S1878-8750(22)00459-4. [Epub ahead of print]
      OBJECTIVES: With the recent paradigm shift in neurosurgical publications, open access (OA) publishing is burgeoning along with traditional publishing methods. We aimed to explore costs of publication across 53 journals.METHODS: We identified 53 journals publishing neurosurgical work. Journal type, submission and open access charges, colour print fees, impact indicators, publisher, and subscription prices were obtained from journal and publisher websites. Costs were unified in American Dollars. Mean prices per journal were used to equilibrate membership and subscription discounts. Correlations were performed using Spearman Rho (ρ), p<0.05.
    RESULTS: Of the 53 journals, 12 are OA-only, 40 are hybrid, and 1 is traditional. 22 and 43 journals provide their submission costs by end of phase 1 and 2, respectively (prices always for phase 2; 26 free of charge, 4 under $500, and 1 under $1000). Median OA charge is $3286 (49 journals; range $0-$7827). 36 of the 53 journals did not list print fees for colour figures (29 in phase 2). Median fee estimate per figure is $422 (range $25-$1060). Median personal subscription for 1 year is $344 (range $60-$1158; 48 journals). Median institutional subscription for 1 year is $2082 (Range $38-$5510; 34 journals). There is mild positive correlation between journal impact factor and OA fees (ρ=0.287, p=0.046).
    CONCLUSIONS: The lack of easily accessible information about Neurosurgical publications, such as submission costs, or OA charges create unnecessary hurdle and should be remedied. Publishing in Neurosurgery should be a pleasant learning experience for the cost anxiety should not be a limiting factor.
    Keywords:  cost; journal; neurosurgery; publication
  4. BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 11. 12(4): e057598
      OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of self-reported financial conflict-of-interest (COI) disclosures in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) within the requisite disclosure period prior to article submission.DESIGN: Cross-sectional investigation.
    DATA SOURCES: Original clinical-trial research articles published in NEJM (n=206) or JAMA (n=188) from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2017; self-reported COI disclosure forms submitted to NEJM or JAMA with the authors' published articles; Open Payments website (from database inception; latest search: August 2019).
    MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Financial data reported to Open Payments from 2014 to 2016 (a time period that included all subjects' requisite disclosure windows) were compared with self-reported disclosure forms submitted to the journals. Payments selected for analysis were defined by Open Payments as 'general payments.' Payment types were categorised as 'disclosed,' 'undisclosed,' 'indeterminate' or 'unrelated'.
    RESULTS: Thirty-one articles from NEJM and 31 articles from JAMA met inclusion criteria. The physician-authors (n=118) received a combined total of US$7.48 million. Of the 106 authors (89.8%) who received payments, 86 (81.1%) received undisclosed payments. The top 23 most highly compensated received US$6.32 million, of which US$3.00 million (47.6%) was undisclosed.
    CONCLUSIONS: High payment amounts, as well as high proportions of undisclosed financial compensation, regardless of amount received, comprised potential COIs for two influential US medical journals. Further research is needed to explain why such high proportions of general payments were undisclosed and whether journals that rely on self-reported COI disclosure need to reconsider their policies.
  5. Complement Ther Med. 2022 Apr 08. pii: S0965-2299(22)00030-9. [Epub ahead of print] 102828
      The main purpose of review articles is to increase insight into the best possible practice for increasing the health condition of future subjects. This requires the collection of as many relevant data as possible from earlier case studies, but such data should be mutually independent. If the data from the reviewed single- or multi-case studies are not entirely mutually independent, the conclusions of the review study may easily - though not necessarily - become biased. This is shown on the basis of a 2020 systematic review about the effects of deep dry needling on spasticity and related physical disabilities. We analyzed this study by checking undisclosed possible overlaps regarding the subjects dealt with in the various case studies that were reviewed. This analysis raised also some questions about the accuracy of the number of subjects that had been treated, which is an aspects of which errors can commonly not be disclosed by the readers. The objective of our Letter is to show that insufficient attention by authors, editor and reviewers for an unambiguous presentation of the data regarding the subjects dealt with can make it impossible for readers to draw correct conclusions regarding the optimization of possible treatments.
    Keywords:  Manuscript handling; Review studies; Scientific reliability
  6. Curr Med Res Opin. 2022 Apr 11. 1-4
      Publication-associated plain language summaries are brief, jargon-free summaries of scientific publications. They are intended for a broad, non-expert audience to help maximize the accessibility of the publication. Plain language summaries are typically found alongside peer-reviewed publications or in supplementary materials and can be indexed in PubMed. In this narrative commentary, we present the perspectives of five day-to-day users of plain language summaries from different stakeholder groups, gained through semi-structured qualitative interviews about the users' experiences with and opinions of plain language summaries.
    Keywords:  Plain language summary; accessibility; discoverability; inclusivity; medical research; public engagement
  7. Psychophysiology. 2022 May;59(5): e14052
      Since its beginnings in the early 20th century, the psychophysiological study of human brain function has included research into the spectral properties of electrical and magnetic brain signals. Now, dramatic advances in digital signal processing, biophysics, and computer science have enabled increasingly sophisticated methodology for neural time series analysis. Innovations in hardware and recording techniques have further expanded the range of tools available to researchers interested in measuring, quantifying, modeling, and altering the spectral properties of neural time series. These tools are increasingly used in the field, by a growing number of researchers who vary in their training, background, and research interests. Implementation and reporting standards also vary greatly in the published literature, causing challenges for authors, readers, reviewers, and editors alike. The present report addresses this issue by providing recommendations for the use of these methods, with a focus on foundational aspects of frequency domain and time-frequency analyses. It also provides publication guidelines, which aim to (1) foster replication and scientific rigor, (2) assist new researchers who wish to enter the field of brain oscillations, and (3) facilitate communication among authors, reviewers, and editors.
    Keywords:  EEG; MEG; electrophysiology; frequency domain analysis; time-frequency analysis
  8. BMJ Qual Saf. 2022 Apr 15. pii: bmjqs-2021-014431. [Epub ahead of print]
    Keywords:  medication safety; patient safety; patient-centred care
  9. Psychol Methods. 2022 Apr 11.
      Statistical network models describing multivariate dependency structures in psychological data have gained increasing popularity. Such comparably novel statistical techniques require specific guidelines to make them accessible to the research community. So far, researchers have provided tutorials guiding the estimation of networks and their accuracy. However, there is currently little guidance in determining what parts of the analyses and results should be documented in a scientific report. A lack of such reporting standards may foster researcher degrees of freedom and could provide fertile ground for questionable reporting practices. Here, we introduce reporting standards for network analyses in cross-sectional data, along with a tutorial and two examples. The presented guidelines are aimed at researchers as well as the broader scientific community, such as reviewers and journal editors evaluating scientific work. We conclude by discussing how the network literature specifically can benefit from such guidelines for reporting and transparency. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
  10. Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Apr 11. 8(1): 12
      BACKGROUND: Patient advocates are increasingly authoring peer-reviewed publications that could enhance patient care and understanding of the lived experience. Although patient authorship may be seen as an innovation in the peer-reviewed publication environment and some may not be aware of or accept patient authorship, we know patient-authored publications exist. However, identifying patient-authored publications is often challenging and time-consuming.MAIN BODY: In this commentary, we propose a definition for a patient author and patient-authored publications. We outline factors driving the increase in patient authorship, including patient interest, recognition of the value of including the patient voice and major funders recognising the importance of involving patient advocates in research. Evidence and experience-based guidance on patient authorship is emerging, and we highlight practical guidance for patient advocates on authoring peer-reviewed publications. To gain a better understanding of patient authorship, an efficient method is needed to identify patient-authored publications. A dataset on patient-authored publications could be used for a range of quantitative and qualitative research studies. The affiliation search function in PubMed can provide an easy, and reproducible way to identify a dataset of patient-authored publications in the international peer-reviewed literature, but only if patient authors include a standard metatag, (e.g. Patient Author) as one of their listed affiliations, combined with other affiliations as appropriate. From 2020 to 2021, there was a nine-fold increase in patient-authored publications in PubMed identified using the Patient Author tag. We recognize that terminology can be contentious and some authors may prefer alternative metatags. Further efforts are required to gain consensus on a suitable, standard metatag or set of metatags to use to show the true extent of patient authorship.
    CONCLUSION: Patient authorship is not only legitimate, but it also exemplifies the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. Stakeholders in the publication community need to review their policies and procedures to identify and address barriers to patient authorship. Patient advocates, funders, researchers and publishers could all help to promote awareness and acceptance of patient authorship and the merits of using a standard metatag or set of metatags, so that patient-authored publications are no longer hidden in plain sight.
    Keywords:  Authorship; Diversity; Equity and inclusion; Patient and public involvement; Patient author; PubMed; Publications
  11. Nutr Health. 2022 Apr 13. 2601060221094126
      Background: Obesity is sweeping across the developed world. Yet, the public remains largely confused when it comes to the nature of dietary habits which would serve to counteract this trend. Aim: I highlight the responsibility that the scientific community bears when it comes to the confusion, and explain the kind of actions that are needed if the public trust in science is to be maintained. Methods: Starting from an example of a recently published and prominently featured article in a leading journal, I analyse various common methodological aspects of dietetics research and the consequent claims, contextualizing this within the broader environment which includes the scientific publishing process and the mainstream media. Results: Methodological inadequacies, erroneous claims, and misleading interpretations of findings are often found in dietetics research, highlighting the deficiencies of the system which fails to uphold the fundamental principles of scientific inquiry. Conclusion: It is imperative that individual scientists speak out and challenge poor science, unsatisfactory publishing processes, and bombastic and misleading communication of research.
    Keywords:  Science communication; nutrient timing; nutrition; obesity; peer review; publication
  12. Neurotrauma Rep. 2022 ;3(1): 139-157
      Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major public health problem. Despite considerable research deciphering injury pathophysiology, precision therapies remain elusive. Here, we present large-scale data sharing and machine intelligence approaches to leverage TBI complexity. The Open Data Commons for TBI (ODC-TBI) is a community-centered repository emphasizing Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable data sharing and publication with persistent identifiers. Importantly, the ODC-TBI implements data sharing of individual subject data, enabling pooling for high-sample-size, feature-rich data sets for machine learning analytics. We demonstrate pooled ODC-TBI data analyses, starting with descriptive analytics of subject-level data from 11 previously published articles (N = 1250 subjects) representing six distinct pre-clinical TBI models. Second, we perform unsupervised machine learning on multi-cohort data to identify persistent inflammatory patterns across different studies, improving experimental sensitivity for pro- versus anti-inflammation effects. As funders and journals increasingly mandate open data practices, ODC-TBI will create new scientific opportunities for researchers and facilitate multi-data-set, multi-dimensional analytics toward effective translation.
    Keywords:  FAIR principles; Open Data Commons; data sharing; multi-variate analysis; principal component analysis; traumatic brain Injury
  13. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol. 2022 Mar-Apr;66(2):pii: S1888-4415(22)00062-5. [Epub ahead of print]66(2): 75-76
  14. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol. 2022 Mar-Apr;66(2):pii: S1888-4415(22)00063-7. [Epub ahead of print]66(2): T75-T76
  15. J Cancer Educ. 2022 Apr 12.
      Scientific writing is an important skill for cancer researchers. The training and mentoring of researchers in their early careers can positively impact both their short- and long-term goals in sharing science and consequently improving cancer care for their societies. In this reflection, we outline top ten lessons that we learned from the scientific writing workshop held in September and November 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE). We hope that this reflection might inform early-career cancer researchers about the importance of writing in science and strengthen the skills they need to develop in order to get their research published.
    Keywords:  Cancer; Early career; Publication; Scientific writing
  16. JAAPA. 2022 Apr 07.
      OBJECTIVE: PA authors face many barriers to publication and may benefit from additional transparency in the editorial decision-making process. This study examined the most common reasons for rejection of original research submissions to JAAPA.METHODS: Senior JAAPA editors conducted a thematic analysis of reviewer and editor comments and used these broad themes to classify the reasons for rejection of original research manuscripts submitted to JAAPA.
    RESULTS: From October 2015 through December 2018, 77 research manuscripts were submitted to JAAPA. Fifty-six manuscripts were rejected, resulting in an overall rejection rate of 73.7%. Common reasons for rejection included: methodologic issues (55.4%), content outside the journal's scope (42.9%), poor writing quality (17.9%), guideline nonadherence (3.6%), lack of novelty (3.6%), and author(s) declining to revise the manuscript (1.8%).
    CONCLUSION: The most common reasons for manuscript rejection can be overcome through research planning and manuscript preparation.
  17. Assist Inferm Ric. 2022 Jan-Mar;41(1):41(1): 33-36
      . Why we need twitter. Assistenza infermieristica e ricerca will shortly be available also on twitter. Twitter is a valuable science communication and marketing tool for academic journals to increase web-based visibility, promote research, and translate science to lay and scientific audiences. Medical journals use Twitter to engage and disseminate their research articles and implement a range of strategies to maximize reach and impact. The first benefit of using Twitter derives very simply from the ability to follow the flow of information originated from credible sources. First and foremost, from the the major magazines in one's field of interest. The use of Twitter may help to delve into areas close though not strictly related to nursing, thus broadening one's perspective. Some advice and warn on for use are proposed.
  18. Nicotine Tob Res. 2022 Apr 13. pii: ntac101. [Epub ahead of print]
  19. Nature. 2022 Apr;604(7905): 223
    Keywords:  Climate sciences; Publishing; Vaccines