bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2021–12–19
twenty papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. Preprint servers and patent prior art: Preprints can jeopardize the patentability of an invention: Preprints can jeopardize the patentability of an invention.
  2. Reductionism that leads to manuscript rejection.
  3. Postprints-to-preprints linkage to enhance access to scientific literature.
  4. What Sci-Hub's latest court battle means for research.
  5. Predatory Publishing Practices.
  6. What has Royal Society Open Science achieved in its first few years?
  7. Peer Review Guidance for Evaluating the Narrative Review: Lessons Applied From the Systematic Review.
  8. Reporting of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in clinical trials published in nursing science journals: a descriptive study.
  9. Practical Tools and Guidelines for Young Oncologists From Resource-Limited Settings to Publish Excellence and Advance Their Career.
  10. Six Tips for Success: Writing for Publication.
  11. Public Engagement with Science via Social Media: A Case of Communicating the Pandemic on Twitter.
  12. Bibliometrics: Methods for studying academic publishing.
  13. Feasibility of an Assessment Tool as a Data-Driven Approach to Reducing Racial Bias in Biomedical Publications.
  14. Public communication at research universities: Moving towards (de)centralised communication of science?
  15. [The key is in the words].
  16. Are Conference Posters Being Cited?
  17. A Message from the Editor-in-Chief.
  18. The Journal of Clinical Investigation in the time of COVID-19.
  19. Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2021.
  20. Sharing reflections and expressing appreciation upon completing a decade as co-editor of the IJHPR.
  1. EMBO Rep. 2021 Dec 16. e54439
    Preprint servers and patent prior art: Preprints can jeopardize the patentability of an invention: Preprints can jeopardize the patentability of an invention.
    Jacob S Sherkow.
      Posting papers on preprint servers creates patent 'prior art' and is likely to affect the patentability of any underlying invention.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202154439
  2. Int J Cancer. 2021 Dec 14.
    Reductionism that leads to manuscript rejection.
    Hinrich Gronemeyer.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.33899
  3. Account Res. 2021 Dec 15.
    Postprints-to-preprints linkage to enhance access to scientific literature.
    Khaled Moustafa.
      Preprint servers can enhance the access to scientific literature by bidirectional linkage from published papers (postprints) to their counterpart preprint versions. The current state of linkage is to link preprints to their corresponding postprints (peer-reviewed articles published in journals). Here, I suggest an opposite linkage, from postprints to preprints wherever and whenever preprints are posted on a preprint server. Such connection from paid postprints to free versions (preprints) makes sense as it removes the barriers to get access to paywalled publications freely and easily.
    Keywords:  article processing charge (APC); journal publication; journal publishing; open access; open science repository; postprint to preprint linkage; preprint servers; preprint to postprint linking; scientific literature indexation
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2021.2019024
  4. Nature. 2021 Dec;600(7889): 370-371
    What Sci-Hub's latest court battle means for research.
    Holly Else.
      
    Keywords:  Law; Publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03659-0
  5. Clin Spine Surg. 2021 Dec 15.
    Predatory Publishing Practices.
    Michael Stark, Michael Markowitz, Barrett Woods.
      With open access publishing surging in popularity, it has provided an opportunity for entities to take advantage of the unique business model. Known as predatory journals, these entities accept a large fee in exchange for publication, but do not maintain any form of standards or peer review. This article aims to introduce the history and rise of predatory journals in hopes to further raise awareness and limit their spread.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001275
  6. R Soc Open Sci. 2021 Dec;8(12): 211838
    What has Royal Society Open Science achieved in its first few years?
    Jeremy K M Sanders.
      It has been a pleasure and a privilege to serve as the first Editor-in-Chief of Royal Society Open Science for the past 6 years. I step down at the end of December 2021, having completed two 3-year terms, and am taking the opportunity here to reflect on some of the successes and challenges that the journal has experienced and the innovations that we have introduced. When I was first approached back in 2015, the breadth of the journal, covering the whole of science, resonated with my own interests: my research career has ranged across the entire landscape of chemistry, while my leadership roles have embraced all of science, technology and medicine. The open access ethos, the objective refereeing policy that rejects the idea of only publishing what is in fashion, and the opportunities offered by a new venture that could transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries also all appealed to me. Among our successful innovations are Registered Reports, Replication Studies and the new 'Science, Society and Policy' section. The challenges have included the transition to paid article processing charges (APCs), whether to resist pressure to retract a controversial paper, and bullying of young female authors by established senior males in the same field. I explore all of these below, provide some statistics on the journal's performance, also cover some of the notable papers we have published, and provide some concluding thoughts.
    Keywords:  Achievements; Altmetrics; Open science; Registered Reports; Royal Society Open Science; Science, Society and Policy
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211838
  7. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021 Nov 14. pii: S1053-0770(21)00984-8. [Epub ahead of print]
    Peer Review Guidance for Evaluating the Narrative Review: Lessons Applied From the Systematic Review.
    Reed Harvey, Tiffany M Williams, Marisa Hernandez-Morgan, Matthew A Fischer, Jacques Neelankavil.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2021.11.020
  8. Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Dec 14. 7(1): 88
    Reporting of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in clinical trials published in nursing science journals: a descriptive study.
    Richard Gray, Catherine Brasier, Tessa-May Zirnsak, Ashley H Ng.
       BACKGROUND: Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in research positively affects the relevance, quality, and impact of research. Around 11% of studies published in leading medical journals demonstrate PPIE. The extent of PPIE in nursing research has not been previously studied.
    METHODS: A descriptive study of PPIE in clinical trials published in general nursing science journals between 1st January and 31st August 2021. Data were extracted from included studies against the five items of the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2) short form reporting checklist.
    RESULTS: We searched 27 journals and identified 89 randomised controlled clinical trials. There was no statement or evidence of PPIE in any of the included trials.
    CONCLUSION: Nurse researchers need to ensure that they purposefully involve patients in their research and report this in papers describing study findings.
    Keywords:  Clinical trials; Nursing; PPIE; Patient and public involvement and engagement
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00331-9
  9. JCO Glob Oncol. 2021 Dec;7 1668-1681
    Practical Tools and Guidelines for Young Oncologists From Resource-Limited Settings to Publish Excellence and Advance Their Career.
    Khalid El Bairi, Ouissam Al Jarroudi, Said Afqir.
      Cancer research is evolving worldwide. However, publishing high-quality academic literature in oncology remains challenging for authors in the developing world. Young oncologists in low- and middle-income countries experience several barriers including lack of funding and research facilities, as well as inadequate training. Publication best practices, science integrity, and ethics are required to improve oncology research quality and therefore, improve patients' care in these countries. To achieve this goal, we propose some basic principles and tools that may help young oncologists especially in developing countries overcome these issues and boost their academic careers.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.21.00310
  10. Hisp Health Care Int. 2021 Dec 13. 15404153211066996
    Six Tips for Success: Writing for Publication.
    Maithe Enriquez.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/15404153211066996
  11. Proc Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2021 ;58(1): 759-761
    Public Engagement with Science via Social Media: A Case of Communicating the Pandemic on Twitter.
    Emma Knox, Noriko Hara.
      The poster describes a project which analyzes interactions between laypeople and experts via social media. Our aim is to understand how experts and the general public interact with each other on social media, and how we can use current data to improve these interactions in the future. We created a Twitter bot to obtain data from 15 COVID-19 experts and 7 federal government-sponsored public health organizations from English-speaking countries. The data were analyzed in R to investigate the relationships among Followers, Favorites, Retweets, and Hashtag Count per tweet. The preliminary analysis indicated statistically significant differences between various variables including: Number of Favorites, Number of Retweets, Number of Hashtags, and Number of Followers; the results shed light on the current relationship between the public and experts on social media.
    Keywords:  Social media; Twitter; online public engagement with science; science communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.553
  12. Perspect Med Educ. 2021 Dec 16.
    Bibliometrics: Methods for studying academic publishing.
    Anton Ninkov, Jason R Frank, Lauren A Maggio.
      Bibliometrics is the study of academic publishing that uses statistics to describe publishing trends and to highlight relationships between published works. Likened to epidemiology, researchers seek to answer questions about a field based on data about publications (e.g., authors, topics, funding) in the same way that an epidemiologist queries patient data to understand the health of a population. In this Eye Opener, the authors introduce bibliometrics and define its key terminology and concepts, including relational and evaluative bibliometrics. Readers are introduced to common bibliometric methods and their related strengths and weaknesses. The authors provide examples of bibliometrics applied in health professions education and propose potential future research directions. Health professions educators are consumers of bibliometric reports and can adopt its methodologies for future studies.
    Keywords:  Bibliometrics; Information science; Scholarly communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-021-00695-4
  13. J Med Syst. 2021 Dec 17. 46(1): 10
    Feasibility of an Assessment Tool as a Data-Driven Approach to Reducing Racial Bias in Biomedical Publications.
    Siobhan Wescott, Ronn Johnson, Sangeeta Lamba, Devon Olson, Yolanda Haywood, Carolyn C Meltzer, Ricardo Correa.
      The editorial independence of biomedical journals allows flexibility to meet a wide range of research interests. However, it also is a barrier for coordination between journals to solve challenging issues such as racial bias in the scientific literature. A standardized tool to screen for racial bias could prevent the publication of racially biased papers. Biomedical journals would maintain editorial autonomy while still allowing comparable data to be collected and analyzed across journals. A racially diverse research team carried out a three-phase study to generate and test a racial bias assessment tool for biomedical research. Phase 1, an in-depth, structured literature search to identify recommendations, found near complete agreement in the literature on addressing race in biomedical research. Phase 2, construction of a framework from those recommendations, provides the major innovation of this paper. The framework includes three dimensions of race: 1) context, 2) tone and terminology, and 3) analysis, which are the basis for the Race Equity Vetting Instrument for Editorial Workflow (REVIEW) tool. Phase 3, pilot testing the assessment tool, showed that the REVIEW tool was effective at flagging multiple concerns in widely criticized articles. This study demonstrates the feasibility of the proposed REVIEW tool to reduce racial bias in research. Next steps include testing this tool on a broader sample of biomedical research to determine how the tool performs on more subtle examples of racial bias.
    Keywords:  Biomedical Literature; Editorial Policies; Framework; Racial Bias
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-021-01777-w
  14. Public Underst Sci. 2021 Dec 15. 9636625211058309
    Public communication at research universities: Moving towards (de)centralised communication of science?
    Marta Entradas.
      This research note reports empirical observations on public communication of research institutes within universities, using data from an international quantitative study in eight countries (N = 2030). The note aims to contribute to discussions on the role of science communication at research universities. We observe growing science communication at the institute level, which indicates, at a first glance, a trend towards decentralised communication of science. We argue that these might be places where science communication and public engagement can thrive. Rather than claiming to be conclusive, our goal here is to stimulate discussion on the ongoing changes in the organisational science communication landscape, and the consequences it may have for practice.
    Keywords:  institutional public communication; research institutes; science communication; ‘Decentralisation Hypothesis’
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625211058309
  15. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2021 Jul 01. 59(4): 262-263
    [The key is in the words].
    Alejandro Moctezuma-Paz, Iván Álvarez, Omar Vivas-Medrano, Cecilia Cruz-Sandoval, Omar Chávez-Martínez.
      What is the role of keywords in a scholarly article? What are they for? Are keywords and descriptors the same? In this editorial those and other questions related to the use of keywords are answered, in order for the authors of scholarly articles to choose them properly so that they can guide their potential readers and increase the visibility of their article, which can lead to its citation.
    Keywords:  Medical Subject Headings; Subject Headings; Vocabulary Controlled
  16. Front Res Metr Anal. 2021 ;6 766552
    Are Conference Posters Being Cited?
    Nick Haupka, Cäcilia Schröer, Christian Hauschke.
      We present a small case study on citations of conference posters using poster collections from both Figshare and Zenodo. The study takes into account the years 2016-2020 according to the dates of publication on the platforms. Citation data was taken from DataCite, Crossref and Dimensions. Primarily, we want to know to what extent scientific posters are being cited and thereby which impact posters potentially have on the scholarly landscape and especially on academic publications. Our data-driven analysis reveals that posters are rarely cited. Citations could only be found for 1% of the posters in our dataset. A limitation in this study however is that the impact of academic posters was not measured empirical but rather descriptive.
    Keywords:  academic posters; citation analysis; citations; conferences; scholarly communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.766552
  17. Acta Med Litu. 2020 ;27(2): 45
    A Message from the Editor-in-Chief.
    R Jankauskas.
      A Message from the Editor-in-Chief This issue of Acta medica Lituanica is the result of further evolution: from now on, our journal is being published by the Vilnius University Press. Probably you noted changed design, but most changes are within the system of submission and publishing. All they serve the main goal - wider and more effective dissemination of knowledge. Vilnius University Press is the academic community owned publishing platform - it means that academics play a key role in dissemination of results of their research. This enables also more effective implementation of academic freedom, more innovations, more transparency. Finally, it also means more Open Science. Publications in our journal are and will be freely accessible and free of article processing charges. This is already the second issue that was formed at the time of extreme challenges for biomedical community due to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Many of us found ourselves at the frontline dealing with this critical situation and fulfilling our duty to society. This issue starts with a review paper dedicated to the problem No.1; some more are under review. Another paper is dealing with professional burnout - not a minor problem for health professionals nowadays. Other research papers and case studies remind us about life before and (let's hope) after the pandemic. Finally, I want to thank our reviewers who sacrificed their time evaluating manuscripts: Sigita Aidietienė Vidmantas Alekna Karolis Ažukaitis Valdas Banys Aušra Beržanskytė Žana Bumbulienė Jolanta Dadonienė Gytė Damulevičienė Edvardas Danila Audrius Dulskas Milda Endzinienė Eglė Ereminienė Žymantas Jagelavičius Ligita Jančorienė Ričardas Janilionis Augustina Jankauskienė Dalius Jatužis Tomas Kačergius Vytautas Kasiulevičius Jacek Kubica Vaidutis Kučinskas Zita Kučinskienė Limas Kupčinskas Sigita Lesinskienė Mieczyslaw Litwin Rūta Mameniškienė Rūta Nadišauskienė Alvydas Navickas Janina Petkevičienė Narūnas Porvaneckas Tomas Poškus Dainius Pūras Rūta Sargautytė Jūratė Šipylaitė Povilas Sladkevičius Eugenijus Stratilatovas Arūnas Strumila Rasa Strupaitė-Šileikienė Virgilijus Tarutis Vytautas Tutkus Albertas Ulys Vincas Urbonas Algirdas Utkus Birutė Vaišnytė Respectfully, Prof. Dr Rimantas Jankauskas, Editor-in-Chief Acta medica Lituanica.
  18. J Clin Invest. 2021 Dec 15. pii: e156409. [Epub ahead of print]131(24):
    The Journal of Clinical Investigation in the time of COVID-19.
    Arturo Casadevall, Sarah Jackson, Gregg L Semenza, Gordon F Tomaselli, Rexford S Ahima.
      In this editorial, we describe the experience of the JCI editors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our goal is to share how we operated during the pandemic, recount how the JCI contributed to the response, highlight some of the major papers we published on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, and impart our insights in the hope that these are helpful to journal editors that may need to deal with similar types of crises in the future.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI156409
  19. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2021 Dec 13.
    Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2021.
    Stephan von Haehling, Andrew J S Coats, Stefan D Anker.
      The Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle (JCSM) aims to publish articles with relevance to wasting disorders and illnesses of the muscle in the broadest sense. In order to avoid publication of inappropriate articles and to avoid protracted disputes, the Editors have established ethical guidelines that detail a number of regulations to be fulfilled prior to submission to the journal. This article updates the principles of ethical authorship and publishing in JCSM and its two daughter journals JCSM Rapid Communication and JCSM Clinical Reports. We require the corresponding author, on behalf of all co-authors, to certify adherence to the following principles: All authors listed on a manuscript considered for publication have approved its submission and (if accepted) approve publication in the journal; Each named author has made a material and independent contribution to the work submitted for publication; No person who has a right to be recognized as author has been omitted from the list of authors on the submitted manuscript; The submitted work is original and is neither under consideration elsewhere nor that it has been published previously in whole or in part other than in abstract form; All authors certify that the submitted work is original and does not contain excessive overlap with prior or contemporaneous publication elsewhere, and where the publication reports on cohorts, trials, or data that have been reported on before the facts need to be acknowledged and these other publications must be referenced; All original research work has been approved by the relevant bodies such as institutional review boards or ethics committees; All relevant conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, that may affect the authors' ability to present data objectively, and relevant sources of funding of the research in question have been duly declared in the manuscript; All authors certify that they will submit the original source data to the editorial office upon request; The manuscript in its published form will be maintained on the servers of the journal as a valid publication only as long as all statements in these guidelines remain true; If any of the aforementioned statements ceases to be true, the authors have a duty to notify as soon as possible the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, so that the available information regarding the published article can be updated and/or the manuscript can be withdrawn.
    Keywords:  Ethical guidelines; Publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12899
  20. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2021 Dec 15. 10(1): 63
    Sharing reflections and expressing appreciation upon completing a decade as co-editor of the IJHPR.
    Bruce Rosen.
      The Israel Journal of Health Policy Research (IJHPR) was launched in January 2012. In December 2021 it will be completing 10 years of continuous publication. I have had the privilege of serving as the journal's co-editor in chief during this period, and after ten years of service I am now preparing to step down from that role. IJHPR achievements of which I am particularly proud include remaining true to its mission, attracting manuscripts from virtually all the Israeli institutions engaged in health policy research as well as many leading institutions abroad, widening the circle of Israeli professionals who are submitting manuscripts to journals, and helping many established Israeli academics expand their repertoires to include articles with strong policy components. Several people and organizations have helped make editing the IJHPR such a wonderful experience for me. They include IJHPR co-editor Avi Israeli, IJHPR associate editor Steve Schoenbaum, the Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research (which sponsors the journal), BioMed Central (which publishes the journal), the Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute (my employer), my family (and particularly my wife, Laura Rosen), and the thousands of authors who have chosen to publish with the IJHPR. May the journal's second decade be even better than its first one!
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-021-00497-3
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:28.