bims-evares Biomed News
on Evaluation of research
Issue of 2026–08–23
eighteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society



  1. Crit Care Med. 2026 Aug 21.
       OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether gender disparity in authorship of critical care scientific publications is greater in studies originating from low- and middle-income countries (L/MICs) compared with those from high-income countries (HICs).
    DESIGN: Cross-sectional bibliometric analysis.
    SETTING: Original research publications, including observational studies and randomized controlled trials, published from 2018 to 2022 in the ten critical care journals with the highest 2022 impact factors as reported by Clarivate Analytics Journal Citation Reports.
    PATIENTS: A total of 4,982 publications, 4,479 from HICs, and 503 from L/MICs, comprising 50,357 authors.
    INTERVENTIONS: None.
    MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We evaluated the proportion of women authors overall, and in first and senior positions; proportions of coauthors; differences by country income classification; temporal trends; and subgroup analyses stratified by funding type. Women accounted for 31.3% of all authors, 35.4% of first authors, and 21.4% of senior authors. Women's representation was higher in L/MICs than in HICs (38.2% vs. 30.6%; p < 0.01). The proportion of women in first (40.7% vs. 34.7%; p < 0.01) and senior (27.6% vs. 20.7%; p < 0.01) positions was also higher in publications from L/MICs. Coauthorships (i.e., the dyad of first and senior authors) involving at least one woman accounted for less than 30% across all publications. There were temporal increases in overall and senior woman authorship in HICs (p < 0.01 for both) and in overall authorship in L/MICs (p = 0.02). Women authors were more frequently represented among funded publications from L/MICs.
    CONCLUSIONS: Among high-impact critical care journals, substantial gender disparities persisted in authorship of publications. Women are better represented in publications from L/MICs, and there was an increase in women's authorship over time in both HICs and L/MICs from 2018 to 2022.
    Keywords:  authorship in scientific publications; critical care; developing countries; developed countries; gender equity; gender diversity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000007309
  2. Front Ophthalmol (Lausanne). 2026 ;6 1813075
       Background: Bibliometric analyses within the field of neuro-ophthalmology are limited. The current study utilizes the relative citation ratio (RCR), a National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored index that separates measures of research impact and productivity into independent variables, to evaluate scholarly output within this cohort.
    Methods: Fellowship-trained neuro-ophthalmologists at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited institutions in the United States were indexed using the NIH iCite database. Publication count, mean RCR score (mRCR), and weighted RCR score (wRCR) were obtained between October 2023 and January 2024. Data were compared using univariate and multivariate ordinary least squares regression analyses, and chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables.
    Results: The cohort included 256 neuro-ophthalmologists from 103 institutions. The majority were male (60.9%), ophthalmology trained (69.1%), and did not hold a PhD (88.3%). Median publication count was 26 (interquartile range [IQR], 8.25-84.50), median mRCR was 1.23 (IQR, 0.78-1.68), and median wRCR was 31.48 (IQR, 7.61-99.94). Professor rank was independently associated with significantly higher publication counts, mRCR, and weighted RCR. Completion of a neurology residency was independently associated with higher mean RCR but not publication count or weighted RCR. Gender was not independently associated with publication count, mRCR, or wRCR after multivariable adjustment. Female faculty were significantly underrepresented among professors despite greater representation within more recent residency cohorts.
    Conclusion: Academic neuro-ophthalmologists demonstrate high levels of research productivity and impact, with a median mRCR exceeding the NIH benchmark value of 1.0. Academic rank was the strongest independent predictor of cumulative scholarly productivity and article level influence, while completion of a neurology residency was associated with higher average article influence but not greater overall scholarly output. Although research productivity was comparable after adjustment for career stage and academic rank, women remain underrepresented in senior academic positions. These findings establish benchmark RCR values for academic neuro-ophthalmology and provide a framework for future investigations of scholarly development and academic advancement.
    Keywords:  academia; academic medicine; bibliometrics; neuro-ophthalmology; relative citation ratio; research productivity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2026.1813075
  3. J Pediatr Urol. 2026 Jul 22. pii: S1477-5131(26)00448-1. [Epub ahead of print] 106169
       INTRODUCTION: The American Urological Association (AUA) Annual Meeting is consistently competitive, accepting approximately one-third of the scientific abstracts submitted. Following abstract presentation, manuscript publication offers the opportunity to more widely disseminate research findings and methodology. Several prior studies have evaluated the publication rate of urology abstracts presented at regional and/or national conferences. In this study, we aim to both identify factors of Pediatric Urology abstracts presented at the annual meeting that were associated with an increased likelihood of manuscript publication and evaluate trends over time.
    METHODS: All Pediatric Urology abstracts presented at AUA annual meetings from 2013 to 2022 were reviewed. Data was collected on primary author degree type, presentation format (e.g. poster v. podium), and author geographic region. Manuscripts were searched for on PubMed and Google Scholar using the abstract titles and authors' names. Journal name, year of publication, and journal impact factor were recorded for published manuscripts. Impact factors were based on 2024 published values. SPSS statistical software was then used to analyze descriptive statistics and perform chi square analysis for categorical variables. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests with pairwise Bonferroni correction, Cochran-Armitage trend testing, multivariable logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier time-to-event analyses were performed.
    RESULTS: 604 Pediatric Urology abstracts were presented from 2013 to 2022. Of these, 456 (75.5%) were moderated posters, 112 (18.5%) were videos, and 36 (6.0%) were podium presentations. 240 (39.7%) of these resulted in published manuscripts. Median time to publication was 1 years (IQR 1-2). 88.8% of published manuscripts (n = 213) had a physician listed as first author. Though there was an upward trend in the number of abstracts presented at annual meetings from 2013 (n = 72) to 2022 (n = 94), the rate of manuscript publication did not differ significantly across years (p = 0.066). An ordinal trend test, however, indicated a modest decline in publication rate across the study period (Cochran-Armitage p = 0.030). Manuscripts were published in 55 different journals with a median impact factor of 2.3 (IQR 1.9-6.8). 217 manuscripts (90.4%) were published within two years of abstract presentation. In contrast to several prior studies which found that podium presentations were more likely to subsequently get published as manuscripts, moderated poster presentations demonstrated the highest publication rate (44.7%), followed by podium presentations (30.6%), and video presentations (22.3%). Pairwise comparison with Bonferroni correction showed this format effect was driven by the difference between moderated poster and video presentations (adjusted p < 0.001); podium presentation were not statistically separable from either group.AUA geographic region was not associated with likelihood of manuscript publication (p = 0.648).
    CONCLUSIONS: The overall manuscript publication rate for Pediatric Urology abstracts at the AUA annual meeting over ten years was 39.7% (publication searches conducted through March 2026). Presentation format was significantly associated with publication likelihood; pairwise comparison showed this effect was driven by the difference between poster and video presentations, while podium presentations were not statistically separable form either group given the limited window in which podium was offered (2019 and 2022). With moderated poster presentations demonstrating the highest publication rate. Geographic region did not impact likelihood of publication. The annual conversion rate showed a modest decline across the study period (trend p = 0.030), which may partly reflect shorter publication follow-up for recent meeting years.
    Keywords:  AUA; Abstract outcomes; Pediatric urology; Publications
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2026.106169
  4. Front Res Metr Anal. 2026 ;11 1829439
      The increasing prominence of global university rankings has fundamentally transformed the strategic landscape of higher education institutions worldwide. This review examines the strategic application of bibliometric indicators, with particular emphasis on Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI), in the context of university ranking systems. We propose a framework for institutions to develop metric-informed strategies while maintaining research integrity and avoiding the pitfalls of metric manipulation. The review concludes with actionable recommendations for universities seeking to enhance their global standing through evidence-based research management practices.
    Keywords:  bibliometrics; citation analysis; field-weighted citation impact; normalized metrics; research evaluation; scopus; strategic planning; university rankings
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2026.1829439
  5. J Opioid Manag. 2026 May-Jun;22(3):pii: jom.0988. [Epub ahead of print]22(3): 289-297
       OBJECTIVE: Terminology used in scientific literature is associated with resource allocation, research prioritization, and public perception. The aim of this study is to describe how research on fentanyl is associated with a change in terminology used to refer to its use.
    DESIGN: The study utilized bibliometric analysis of 11,982 publications from 2000 to 2023 from Web of Science using the topic search terms "Fentanyl" and "Humans." These articles were then analyzed via VOSViewer and Microsoft Excel.® Results: Publications adopting nonstigmatizing terminology were more frequently connected to research on substance use treatment, rehabilitation, and medication-assisted treatments (methadone, naltrexone, buprenorphine). The adaptation demonstrated greater connections to these medications, methadone, naltrexone, and buprenorphine, and reflects an emerging focus on fentanyl-specialized addiction medicine.
    CONCLUSIONS: Older publications frequently utilized stigmatizing terminology and lacked a coherent research direction. Conversely, recent adoption of nonstigmatizing language coincides with increased research output focusing on treatment, emergency overdose management, epidemiology, and public health. Notably, the adoption of nonstigmatized terms coincides with increased publications and a new focus on fentanyl-related research.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5055/jom.0988
  6. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2026 Aug 17. 1-6
      Gender disparities in scientific authorship remain a relevant issue in addiction research. This study aimed to examine temporal trends and regional differences in female first authorship among researchers affiliated with Spanish institutions publishing in high-impact journals. A bibliometric approach was applied to Q1 journals primarily focused on addiction research, with publications retrieved from inception to 31 December 2025. A total of 687 publications with first authors affiliated with Spanish institutions were identified, of which 48.6% had female first authors. Female first authorship increased substantially over time, from 35.3% in the period 1986-1995 to 54.7% in 2016-2025. Regression analysis confirmed a significant positive temporal trend (odds ratio = 1.036, 95% CI: 1.018-1.053, p < .001). Female first authorship in addiction research in Spain has increased significantly over time. Continued efforts are needed to promote equity and address structural barriers in scientific research, as the observed patterns may reflect the influence of multiple unmeasured factors.
    Keywords:  Addiction; Spain; authorship; gender
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2026.2718974
  7. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med. 2026 Mar-Apr;28(1_suppl):28(1_suppl): 19S-22S
       BACKGROUND: Women have historically been underrepresented in surgical subspecialties like facial plastic surgery. Authorship is a key metric in career progression; hence, it is important to assay progress in this domain.
    STUDY OBJECTIVES: To identify trends in female authorship within facial plastic surgery over time.
    METHODS: Publications from three facial plastic surgery journals were reviewed for the gender of authors from 2007 to 2022. Female authorship across time was compared using chi-squared and Cochrane-Armitage trend tests.
    RESULTS: A total of 6,921 original research articles were identified; 2,419 articles (34.9%) had female authorship. Female authorship showed a significant increase over time for first/single authors (p = 0.028), last authors (p = 0.015), and all authors combined (p = 0.013). Male authorship was significantly higher across all years studied (p = 0.008). Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine (FPSAM), Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) had significant increases in overall female authorship from 2007 to 2022 (p = 0.003 and p = 0.03, respectively). FPSAM showed a significant increase in female first/single authorship (p = 0.001), while PRS showed a significant increase in female last authorship (p = 0.02).
    CONCLUSION: Female authorship in facial plastic surgery is increasing over time. First/single authorship is advancing more rapidly, possibly reflecting more female trainees advancing their careers. Further work is needed to support female representation in the facial plastic surgery literature.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/26893614251392591
  8. Simul Healthc. 2026 Aug 21.
      Growing emphasis has been placed on the importance of local authorship in research from low and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to investigate local authorship of simulation-based education research conducted in LMICs through an in-depth authorship analysis of publications retrieved from a systematic review. After retrieving 27,738 records, 97 studies from 50 LMICs were included. The median number of authors was 8, ranging was from 2 to 18. Ninety-three studies (95%) included a local author, and local authors composed 145/291 (49%) of the total first, second, or final (FSF) authorship positions. Although there was a substantial increase in the number of published studies, there were no significant changes to the proportion of local FSF authors over time: 44% in 2002-2006; 63% in 2007-2011; 47% in 2012-2016; and 49% in 2017-2022 (P = 0.45). The representation of local FSF authors is lower compared with other fields, though this may be reflective of including only studies that conducted high-level evaluation, or the fact that simulation is a relatively new field. Simulation researchers should actively support and include local authors to ensure programs are appropriate, contextualized and impactful, while making concerted efforts to develop local research capacity in LMICs.
    Keywords:  authorship; equity; global health; medical education; simulation-based education
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000956
  9. Eur J Dent Educ. 2026 Aug 19.
       OBJECTIVE: To analyse gender equity in research funding and project coordination among researchers in Oral Pathology and Oral Medicine (OP/OM) in Brazil.
    METHODS: This cross-sectional study analysed publicly available data from members of the Brazilian Society of Stomatology and Oral Pathology. Curricula were accessed via the Lattes Platform. Researchers with < 5 years post-PhD or no registered research projects were excluded, resulting in a final sample of 133 researchers. Extracted variables included gender, scientific production, number of projects, funded projects, collaborative roles and project coordination.
    RESULTS: Women comprised 55.6% of the sample. Male researchers had significantly higher mean total career publications (158.80 vs. 99.59; p = 0.008) and more publications in Journal Citation Reports-indexed journals (74.08 vs. 46.95; p = 0.005). However, no significant gender differences were found in mean number of research projects developed (22.15 vs. 21.37; p = 0.601), funded projects (5.69 vs. 7.08; p = 0.714), projects coordinated (13.46 vs. 14.66; p = 0.996), or collaborative participations (8.69 vs. 6.71; p = 0.265).
    CONCLUSION: Despite women constituting most researchers in Brazilian OP/OM, significant gender disparities persist in scientific output metrics. Conversely, access to research funding and project leadership opportunities appears equitable, highlighting the need to address barriers affecting women's publication rates.
    Keywords:  gender equity; men; oral medicine; oral pathology; women
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.70283
  10. Ann Anat. 2026 Aug 21. pii: S0940-9602(26)00573-X. [Epub ahead of print] 153352
      The article presents a systematic investigation into the use of human specimens in scientific contributions to the Anatomischer Anzeiger. The journal represented, since its founding in 1886, an attempt to integrate the wider field of morphological research, as well as its internationality. Simultaneously, anatomists regularly voiced their perception of a discipline in crisis, of increasing fragmentation and decreasing relevance, a perception that was not least linked to the scientific significance of the deceased human body. Focusing on the period between 1900 and 1965, this article traces the frequency of the use of human specimens over time, the development of its international composition and the distribution of provenances of specimens used. The investigation shows two contrarian tendencies, that of an absolute decrease in overall publications in the Anatomischer Anzeiger and that of a relative increase in publications relying on human specimens; it relates these tendencies to a decrease in the international composition of its authorship and an increase in the number of articles stemming from German researchers and institutions; and it displays a relative steadiness of different provenances of human specimens, with the notable exception of human specimens stemming from executed persons as well as other unethical contexts, which show a unique development related to political conditions.
    Keywords:  Body procurement; History of Anatomy; Human remains; Morphology; National Socialism
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2026.153352
  11. Soc Stud Sci. 2026 Aug 18. 3063127261474439
      A trend towards more and larger research collaborations in the sciences raises questions about how individual scientists who work primarily in collaborations receive recognition. Experimental high-energy physics is known for exceptionally large research collaborations, with publications featuring thousands of authors in alphabetical order. Consequently, the question of how individual scientists receive recognition has been explicitly discussed in this discipline. In this article, I describe discussions and efforts to improve the recognition of individual researchers in the ATLAS collaboration at the European Laboratory for Particle Physics (CERN), based on an analysis of documents and interviews with collaboration members of all career stages. I analyze these accounts by introducing a conceptual framework distinguishing between elementary and institutionalized recognition, and recognition as appreciation and admiration, respectively. I show that articulations of recognition are mobilized by the collaboration to reproduce the experiment and the community. Drawing on these observations, I argue for a broader concept of recognition in the social studies of science. Beyond the notion of recognition as symbolic capital for individuals, we should also consider the reproductive and stabilizing capacity of recognition for scientific communities. I also show how receiving community-oriented appreciation creates a dilemma for early-career researchers who desire admiration to compete in academic labor markets. The need to value a broader range of contributions in collaborative research therefore requires structural changes in academic career systems.
    Keywords:  community; early-career researchers; high-energy physics; recognition; research collaboration
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127261474439
  12. J Clin Epidemiol. 2026 Aug 20. pii: S0895-4356(26)00340-9. [Epub ahead of print] 112464
       OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have raised concerns arising from the exploitation ("mining") of public health databases for low-quality, mass-produced papers. However, it remains challenging to disambiguate whether such papers originate from paper mills (commercial entities that sell authorships on mass-produced papers) or from the uncoordinated action of individuals facilitated by AI tools and templated workflows. Our study aims to address this question for one particular database, the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD). We selected this database after noticing that one of our papers on Bayesian age-period-cohort models has recently been experiencing a rapid surge in geographically clustered citations from GBD papers with Chinese affiliations.
    METHODS: We collected bibliometric and article-level metadata from GBD papers to search for indicators of mass-produced research. Moreover, we assessed 713 full-text articles for reported R versions, availability of code and data, and declaration of generative AI use. For 180 articles, we qualitatively screened the figures for graphical similarities. Finally, we conducted an exploratory scoping investigation of online platforms (social media sites, vendor websites) dedicated to do-it-yourself workflows for secondary analyses of public health data.
    RESULTS: Although we cannot rule out paper mill involvement, our findings suggest that the geographically clustered increase in GBD publications from China is at least partially driven by independent authors. The wide variety of R versions listed in 477 articles points against centralized paper production. Moreover, despite broad graphical similarities in figure styles that suggest the use of shared visualization tools, substantial variation in ancillary details suggest independent authors finalizing figures. This is corroborated by the identification of an online ecosystem of proprietary tools and services specializing in streamlined do-it-yourself workflows for conducting, writing, and publishing secondary analyses of public health data.
    CONCLUSION: Appropriate efforts should be directed towards evaluating the quality of the identified workflows. Stakeholders in scientific integrity should monitor online platforms dedicated to the rapid production of papers, especially in light of the increasing focus on AI-assisted workflows. Code sharing should be mandated for data-driven secondary analyses. Paywalls and proprietary software licenses hinder transparency and reusability, underscoring the importance of free and open-source software for trustworthy and reproducible research.
    Keywords:  Research integrity; open data; open science; paper mills; public health data
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2026.112464
  13. Science. 2026 Aug 20. 393(6813): 751-752
      More than one-fifth of papers at some IEEE conferences appear linked to authorship for sale.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ael6249
  14. PLoS One. 2026 ;21(8): e0346386
      There is a rich variety of approaches for generating scientific knowledge. However, deductive hypothesis testing is often considered a defining characteristic of the scientific method. It has long been shown that individuals' perceptions of how science works often do not align with the actual nature of science, which can adversely impact scientific progress and scientific literacy. Here we present an emergent study exploring how postdoctoral scholars whose work involves materials and chemistry describe the role of hypothesis testing in their work. Through a reflexive thematic analysis of 16 interviews, we highlight how participants broadly report valuing hypothesis-based approaches and view them to be a defining characteristic of "good" science. However, simultaneously, a portion of participants find that deductive hypothesis testing is not always the most practical or useful approach in their work. This dissonance between their value of deductive hypothesis testing and their own scientific practices has implications for how participants view themselves and their work. We argue that the cultural master narrative of science emphasizes the use of deductive hypothesis-based reasoning, and that confronting incompatibilities with this narrative requires participants to formulate alternative narratives to rationalize their work in light of the cultural master narrative. This process influences participants' self-perception, their scientific practices, and/or their scientific communication. These findings illustrate that explicit consideration of the nature of science continues to be important in higher education, and motivate further study in this area. These findings also reinforce existing calls for educators and scientists to explicitly normalize the existence of multiple legitimate approaches for generating scientific knowledge.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0346386