bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2021–12–12
sixteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. Watching the watchers: A report on the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by editors and editorial board members of dental journals.
  2. The Imprimatur of Peer Review.
  3. BDJ Open (2019-2020) and the advantages of open access publishing.
  4. Should anonymous and pseudonymous entities be cited or acknowledged?
  5. Preprint publications: waste in haste or pragmatic progress?
  6. 10 years of open access publishing at the BIR.
  7. Human Intrigue: Meta-analysis approaches for big questions with big data while shaking up the peer review process.
  8. Open Access Publications is our mission in 2022: perspective from the editors of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation.
  9. Implementation of a novel learning experience in scientific writing, publishing, and peer review into a first year pharmacy practice residency.
  10. The role of journals and journal editors in advancing global health research equity.
  11. To Tweet or Not to Tweet: A Longitudinal Analysis of Social Media Use by Global Diabetes Researchers.
  12. An Exploratory Study of Social Media Use and Management by Nursing Journals.
  13. Persuasive discourses in editorials published by the top-five nursing journals: Findings from a 5-year analysis.
  14. Exploring the Accuracy of Cited References in a Selected Data Set of Nursing Journal Articles.
  15. Using social media to improve knowledge translation of scholarly work.
  16. What role should medical journals play during COVID-19?
  1. Eur J Oral Sci. 2021 Dec 08.
    Watching the watchers: A report on the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by editors and editorial board members of dental journals.
    Clovis Mariano Faggion.
      Reporting potential conflicts of interest (COIs) by all parties involved in the publication process is of pivotal importance to increase trust in research. The present study assessed the disclosure of potential COIs of editors and editorial board members of high-ranked dental journals. From 28 April 2021 to 05 May 2021, the websites of 91 dental journals classified by impact factor (IF) were scrutinized to obtain information on the reporting of COI forms of editors and board members, and whether these individuals reported their detailed curriculum vitae (CV). The COI forms were assessed to understand the potential financial and non-financial COIs of editors and board members. Only 11 (12.1%) journals reported COI forms of editors-in-chief (EICs) and associate editors (AEs). No journal reported a COI form of the editorial board members. Of the 100 editors (EICs plus AEs), 25 (25.%) declared connections to for-profit organisations, and seven (7%) to not-for-profit organisations. Five (5%) editors (all AEs) reported non-financial COIs, and 35 (35%) editors reported nothing to declare. Nine (9.9%) journals reported a short CV of editors, which were not informative regarding potential COIs. Editors and editorial board members of high-ranked dental journals should report in more detail their potential COIs.
    Keywords:  conflict of interest; ethics; methods; peer review; publishing; trust
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12823
  2. Arthroscopy. 2021 Dec;pii: S0749-8063(21)00895-1. [Epub ahead of print]37(12): 3387-3388
    The Imprimatur of Peer Review.
    James H Lubowitz, Jefferson C Brand, Michael J Rossi.
      The "imprimatur" of peer review signifies that medical journal reviewers and editors have peer reviewed the submitted work of authors and suggested opportunities for authors to make revisions that will improve their submission, allowing publication. Work that meets the editorial standards for publication after revision receives the imprimatur, a proverbial stamp of approval.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2021.10.005
  3. Br Dent J. 2021 Dec;231(11): 713-715
    BDJ Open (2019-2020) and the advantages of open access publishing.
    Jonathan Lewney.
      BDJ Open is the open access sister journal to the British Dental Journal, and this paper aims to explore the various different articles that BDJ Open has published between 2019 and 2020, in order to highlight which areas authors felt were important to publish open access. Furthermore, this article will investigate the advantages of open access publishing to both authors and readers, as well as the scientific community in general, and will examine how open access publishing has allowed the BDJ Portfolio to publish a wide range of research, both in terms of topic and geography.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3722-4
  4. J Prof Nurs. 2021 Nov-Dec;37(6):pii: S8755-7223(21)00138-1. [Epub ahead of print]37(6): 1207-1209
    Should anonymous and pseudonymous entities be cited or acknowledged?
    Jaime A Teixeira da Silva.
      Post-publication peer review (PPPR) relies on signed or anonymous/pseudonymous comments, and is a fundamental process that complements the weakness of traditional peer review that were not discussed by Trotter (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.10.009). Yet, should anonymous or pseudonymous entities be cited or acknowledged if their identities cannot be confirmed? This discussion abridges some of the issues underlining the fundamentals of PPPR, supplementing the gaps not covered by Trotter, and why there are ethical complexities involved with citing anonymous or pseudonymous entities. Based on COPE and ICMJE ethical guidelines, the argument against citing or acknowledging anonymous or pseudonymous entities is strong, because doing so would likely infringe upon one or more of their stated ethical regulations. Currently, no clearly stated regulations exist pertaining to this issue, so this discussion provides a spring-board for policy makers and academics to initiate a debate, and ultimately establish a clear set of publishing ethics guidelines pertaining to the acknowledgement of anonymous or pseudonymous entities.
    Keywords:  Instructions to authors; Open access; Post-publication peer review; Predatory publishing; Publishing incentives; Research evaluation criteria
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.08.014
  5. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2021 Dec;51(4): 324-326
    Preprint publications: waste in haste or pragmatic progress?
    Durga Prasanna Misra, Vinod Ravindran.
      
    Keywords:  evidence-based medicine; peer review; preprint servers; spin
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.4997/JRCPE.2021.401
  6. Br J Radiol. 2022 Jan 01. 95(1129): 20229001
    10 years of open access publishing at the BIR.
    Simon A Jackson, Kevin M Prise.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20229001
  7. Pac Symp Biocomput. 2022 ;27 156-162
    Human Intrigue: Meta-analysis approaches for big questions with big data while shaking up the peer review process.
    Carly A Bobak, Meghan Muse, Kristine A Giffin, Derek A Williamson, Casey S Greene, Jason H Moore, Dennis P Wall.
      Scientific innovation has long been heralded the collaborative effort of many people, groups, and studies to drive forward research. However, the traditional peer review process relies on reviewers acting in a silo to critically judge research. As research becomes more cross-disciplinary, finding reviewers with appropriate expertise to provide feedback on an entire paper is increasingly difficult. We sought to pilot a crowd peer review process that allowed reviewers to interact with one another in the spirit of collaborative science. We focused this session on manuscripts using meta-analysis, to fully embrace the importance of collaborative and open scientific research in the field of biocomputing. Our pilot study found that researchers enjoy a more collaborative peer review process and felt that the process led to higher quality feedback for submitting authors than traditional review offers.
  8. Eur J Clin Invest. 2021 Dec 10. e13724
    Open Access Publications is our mission in 2022: perspective from the editors of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation.
    Fabrizio Montecucco, Hendrik Nathoe.
      
    Keywords:  open access; pandemic; publications
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13724
  9. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2021 Nov 17. pii: S1544-3191(21)00475-1. [Epub ahead of print]
    Implementation of a novel learning experience in scientific writing, publishing, and peer review into a first year pharmacy practice residency.
    Jennifer E Stark, Jennifer L Cole, Lisa M Barnes, Amanda Chapman, Marcus Costner.
       BACKGROUND: Pharmacists with competency in writing, publishing, and peer review are essential to continue advancing the pharmacy profession, but structured training of these skills may vary.
    OBJECTIVE: The authors set out to implement and assess the impact of a structured learning experience into a postgraduate year 1 pharmacy residency training program that provides tangible experience in the processes of scientific writing, publishing, and peer reviewing.
    METHODS: A quarterly pharmacy newsletter process was augmented to include an editorial board that consisted of residency trained pharmacists with varying levels of experience in scientific writing, publishing, and peer reviewing. The process was designed to provide a structured writing learning experience, to reinforce important concepts and terminology, and to simulate the process of submitting a manuscript to a peer-reviewed publication. Impact of the learning experience on quality of article submissions was assessed by comparing first quarter and last quarter writing submission scores for residents between 2017 and 2020.
    RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed in both raw scores (27 vs. 42.5 points out of 50 points possible, P < 0.05) and the proportion of pass or fail when comparing writing submission scores from the first quarter of the learning experience to submission scores from the last quarter (25% passing rate vs. 83% passing rate, P = 0.007).
    CONCLUSION: This novel learning experience was successfully integrated into a quarterly pharmacy newsletter and resulted in improved writing scores. This structured writing learning experience can be readily integrated into pharmacy residency training programs, and it provides hands-on training in scientific writing, publishing, and peer review for both residents and preceptors.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japh.2021.11.014
  10. Anaesthesia. 2021 Dec 08.
    The role of journals and journal editors in advancing global health research equity.
    D T Jumbam, S Touray, T Totimeh.
      
    Keywords:  authorship; global health; partnerships; research; research equity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15638
  11. Pharmaceut Med. 2021 Dec 07.
    To Tweet or Not to Tweet: A Longitudinal Analysis of Social Media Use by Global Diabetes Researchers.
    Simon Leigh, Max E Noble, Frances E Pearson, James Iremonger, David T Williams.
       BACKGROUND: Engaging influential stakeholders in meaningful exchange is essential for pharmaceutical companies aiming to improve care. At a time where opportunities for face-to-face engagement are limited, the ability to interact, learn and generate actionable insights through digital channels such as Twitter, is of considerable value.
    AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate digital engagement among global diabetes mellitus researchers.
    MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified every global tweet (20,614,515) and scientific publication (44,135) regarding diabetes mellitus from 1 August 2018 to 1 August 2020. Through author matching we combined datasets, resulting in a list of digitally active scientific authors. Generalised linear modelling identified factors predicting their digital engagement.
    FINDINGS: Globally, 2686 diabetes researchers used Twitter to discuss the management of diabetes mellitus, posting 110,346 diabetes-related tweets. As Twitter followers increased, so did tweet frequency (p < 0.001), retweets (p < 0.001) and replies (p < 0.001) to their content. Publication count (overall/per month) and proportion of first/last authorships were unrelated to tweet frequency and the likelihood of being retweeted or replied to (p > 0.05). Those with the most  academic co-authors were significantly less likely to tweet than those with smaller networks (< 50; p = 0.001). Finally, those publishing most frequently on specific themes, including insulin (p = 0.041) and paediatrics (p < 0.001), were significantly more likely to tweet about these themes.
    CONCLUSION: Academic expertise and seniority cannot be assumed as proxies for digital influence. Those aiming to promote science and obtain digital insights regarding condition management should consider looking beyond well-known 'key opinion leaders' to perhaps lesser known 'digital opinion leaders' with smaller academic networks, who are likely to specialise in the delivery of highly specific content to captive audiences.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-021-00408-6
  12. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2021 Dec 07.
    An Exploratory Study of Social Media Use and Management by Nursing Journals.
    Jayne Jennings Dunlap, Julee Waldrop.
      Social media applications are growing across the globe to bring new knowledge and information to target audiences. The use and management of social media in nursing journals have yet to be investigated on a large scale. This cross-sectional study was the first to explore the management of social media and the role of social media editors at nursing journals. Seventy-five nursing journals have pioneered social media as platforms for knowledge dissemination. Almost 51% of nursing journals from this sample are now using social media editors or a designated person to manage online applications, promote journal contents, and increase journal reach.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/ANS.0000000000000403
  13. Nurs Philos. 2021 Dec 05. e12378
    Persuasive discourses in editorials published by the top-five nursing journals: Findings from a 5-year analysis.
    Giovanna Iob, Chiara Visintini, Alvisa Palese.
      The aim is to describe which persuasive tool from the triad of Aristotle (Ethos, Pathos and Logos) is most commonly used in editorials to convey visions and ideas in the nursing journals of the last 5 years (2014-2019). A descriptive qualitative study, based on content analysis, was performed in 2020 and summarized according to the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research principles. Two hundred and eighty-five editorials were included in the study, all of which were published in the top-five nursing journals, specifically, the International Journal of Nursing Studies (5-years Journal Impact Factor [5-Y JIF] = 5.022), the Journal of Nursing Scholarship (=3.374), the Journal of Advanced Nursing (=3.010), the Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing (2.990) and the Nursing Outlook (=2.867). Logos was the most widely used tool in 148 editorials (51.9%). Ethos was used in a quarter of them (n = 72, 25.3%) and the Pathos tool was used to a similar extent (n = 65, 22.8%). Logic is the most used tool for persuasion in nursing editorials; however, nurses who would capture the attention of the nursing community by writing an editorial should also consider the profiles of the potential readers, who might be attracted in different ways by logical-objective, ethical-moral, or emotional discourses.
    Keywords:  Aristotle; ethos; logos; nursing editorials; pathos; persuasive discourse
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12378
  14. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2021 Dec 07.
    Exploring the Accuracy of Cited References in a Selected Data Set of Nursing Journal Articles.
    Leslie H Nicoll, Marilyn H Oermann, Heather Carter-Templeton, Jordan Wrigley, Jacqueline K Owens.
      Accuracy of cited references in scholarly publications gives credit to original authors and offers information for readers to access sources for additional review. Errors in this foundational information can, at a minimum, create confusion and additional burden for consumers; at worst, these errors can make it impossible to locate the original work. For systematic and other types of reviews, finding relevant studies is critical for comprehensiveness and accuracy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of cited references in a curated data set of 100 articles from 100 different nursing journals. From these articles, a sample of references for analysis (n = 666) was created. From this total, only 8 references (1.3%) could not be retrieved at all. Small numbers of references (≤3%) had errors in the author name, journal title, article title, or year, but these did not prevent retrieval. These small numbers suggest that use of current technology including electronic databases and reference management software has improved overall accuracy in reference lists. An unexpected finding was the discovery of enhanced reference lists for online articles at publisher sites. These provide at least 1 and as many as 5 direct links to cited articles, thus increasing accuracy and ease of retrieval. Implications for authors, editors, and publishers are discussed.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/ANS.0000000000000408
  15. Work. 2021 Dec 01.
    Using social media to improve knowledge translation of scholarly work.
    Karen Jacobs.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-213620
  16. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2022 01 01. 23(1): e42-e43
    What role should medical journals play during COVID-19?
    Xianqiang Yu.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.2459/JCM.0000000000001274
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:28.