bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2023–01–01
thirteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. Non-compliance with ethical rules caused by misuse of ORCID accounts: Implications for medical publications in the COVID-19 era.
  2. Combating reviewer fatigue with carrots.
  3. Peer reviewer survey for Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings.
  4. Open issues for education in radiological research: data integrity, study reproducibility, peer-review, levels of evidence, and cross-fertilization with data scientists.
  5. Preprinting and Data Sharing in a New Normal?
  6. To better reproducibility, peer-reviewing musts move forward!
  7. Preprints in Health Professions Education: Raising Awareness and Shifting Culture.
  8. Chaining and the temporal dynamics of scientists' publishing behaviour.
  9. Scientific publications and data evaluation in the digital age (a perspective of a thermodynamics researcher).
  10. Reporting according to PRISMA-A depends on abstract length.
  11. Correction to: A tale of flawed e‑cigarette research undetected by defective peer review process.
  12. [Who is the author of a scientific article?]
  13. Let's save the indexing of the journal "La Tunisie Médicale".
  1. Ethics Med Public Health. 2021 Sep;18 100692
    Non-compliance with ethical rules caused by misuse of ORCID accounts: Implications for medical publications in the COVID-19 era.
    J A Teixeira da Silva.
      
    Keywords:  Abuse; Fake; Integrity; Persistent identifier; Predatory publishing; Publishing; Trust; Verification
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2021.100692
  2. BJUI Compass. 2023 Jan;4(1): 3-4
    Combating reviewer fatigue with carrots.
    Michael A Gorin.
      
    Keywords:  open access publishing; peer‐review; reviewer fatigue
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.207
  3. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2023 ;36(1): 132-134
    Peer reviewer survey for Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings.
    Christopher Peterson, Cynthia Orticio, Kenneth Nugent.
      Editors of medical journals have important responsibilities and depend on peer reviewers to evaluate the quality of submitted manuscripts. However, invitations to undertake peer review are often declined, and in some cases the reviewer fails to provide a review in a reasonable timeframe. Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings surveyed recent reviewers to determine their motivations for undertaking a review and possible benefits associated with reviewing. Sixty-seven reviewers (12.4%) out of 540 responded to the survey request. Reviewer characteristics included long-standing involvement in research (50 reviewers in research ≥11 years) and prior publication (50 reviewers ≥6 articles). Many reviewers thought that reviewing articles represented a responsibility and provided an opportunity for them to contribute to scientific efforts and medical publications and to learn new information. Survey respondents suggested that recognition by the journal was an adequate benefit. This survey, like others, indicates that editors will continue to depend on a core set of reviewers who consider this activity both an opportunity and a responsibility.
    Keywords:  Peer reviewer; publishing; research integrity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2022.2130040
  4. Radiol Med. 2022 Dec 31.
    Open issues for education in radiological research: data integrity, study reproducibility, peer-review, levels of evidence, and cross-fertilization with data scientists.
    Francesco Sardanelli, Anna Colarieti.
      We are currently facing extraordinary changes. A harder and harder competition in the field of science is open in each country as well as in continents and worldwide. In this context, what should we teach to young students and doctors? There is a need to look backward and return to "fundamentals", i.e. the deep characteristics that must characterize the research in every field, even in radiology. In this article, we focus on data integrity (including the "declarations" given by the authors who submit a manuscript), reproducibility of study results, and the peer-review process. In addition, we highlight the need of raising the level of evidence of radiological research from the estimation of diagnostic performance to that of diagnostic impact, therapeutic impact, patient outcome, and social impact. Finally, on the emerging topic of radiomics and artificial intelligence, the recommendation is to aim for cross-fertilization with data scientists, possibly involving them in the clinical departments.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01582-6
  5. J ASEAN Fed Endocr Soc. 2022 ;37(2): 3
    Preprinting and Data Sharing in a New Normal?
    Elizabeth Paz-Pacheco.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.15605/jafes.037.02.01
  6. Ethics Med Public Health. 2021 Dec;19 100723
    To better reproducibility, peer-reviewing musts move forward!
    C Bommier.
      
    Keywords:  Peer-review; Publication; Research
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2021.100723
  7. Acad Med. 2023 Jan 01. 98(1): 17-20
    Preprints in Health Professions Education: Raising Awareness and Shifting Culture.
    Lauren A Maggio, Alice Fleerackers.
      A preprint is a version of a research manuscript posted by its authors to a preprint server before peer review. Preprints are associated with a variety of benefits, including the ability to rapidly communicate research, the opportunity for researchers to receive feedback and raise awareness of their research, and broad and unrestricted access. For early-career researchers, preprints also provide a mechanism for demonstrating research progress and productivity without the lengthy timelines of traditional journal publishing. Despite these benefits, few health professions education (HPE) research articles are deposited as preprints, suggesting that preprinting is not currently integrated into HPE culture. In this article, the authors describe preprints, their benefits and related risks, and the potential barriers that hamper their widespread use within HPE. In particular, the authors propose the barriers of discordant messaging and the lack of formal and informal education on how to deposit, critically appraise, and use preprints. To mitigate these barriers, several recommendations are proposed to facilitate preprints in becoming an accepted and encouraged component of HPE culture, allowing the field to take full advantage of this evolving form of research dissemination.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005001
  8. PLoS One. 2022 ;17(12): e0278389
    Chaining and the temporal dynamics of scientists' publishing behaviour.
    Emmy Liu, Yang Xu.
      Scientific progress, or scientific change, has been an important topic in the philosophy and history of science. Previous work has developed quantitative approaches to characterize the progression of science in different fields, but how individual scientists make progress through their careers is not well understood at a comprehensive scale. We characterize the regularity in the temporal dynamics of scientists' publishing behavior with computational algorithms that predict the historical emerging order of publications from individual scientists. We discover that scientists publish in ways following the processes of chaining that mirror those observed in historical word meaning extension, whereby novel ideas emerge by connecting to existing ideas that are proximal in semantic space. We report findings for predominant exemplar-based chaining that reconstructs the emerging order in the publications of 1,164 award-winning and random-sampled scientists from the fields of Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Economics, and Computer Science over the past century. Our work provides large-scale evidence that scientists across different fields tend to share similar publishing behavior over time by taking incremental steps that build on their past research outputs.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278389
  9. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2023 Jan 01. 564
    Scientific publications and data evaluation in the digital age (a perspective of a thermodynamics researcher).
    Vladimir Diky.
      The state of scientific publications, problems, possible solutions, and underutilized opportunities are discussed on the basis of author's experience as a reader, author, reviewer, and editor. The author feels that significant improvement can be made, which will increase the efficiency of communication and quality of information. The focused area is thermophysical properties related to chemical engineering, but the concerns and conclusions can be applied to a wider scope.
    Keywords:  Chemical engineering; Data; Evaluation; Machine-readable formats; Scientific publications; Thermodynamics; Thermophysics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fluid.2022.113607
  10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Dec 27. pii: S0895-4356(22)00343-2. [Epub ahead of print]
    Reporting according to PRISMA-A depends on abstract length.
    Jasmin Helbach, Falk Hoffmann, Dawid Pieper, Katharina Allers.
       OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reporting of abstracts of systematic reviews (SRs) according to the PRISMA-A 2013 checklist.
    STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A random sample of 534 SRs on effectiveness indexed in PubMed between 2000 and 2019 was assessed. Adherence of abstracts to PRISMA-A was analysed using descriptive statistics. Results were stratified by number of words, structure and year of publication.
    RESULT: The mean score of fully reported PRISMA-A items was 5.4 out of 12, with adherence varying widely between items (0% to 98.8%). Cochrane reviews received higher mean total scores than non-Cochrane reviews (6.3 vs. 5.2). Adherence to PRISMA-A increased linearly with increasing word count. In non-Cochrane reviews authors of structured abstracts more often adhered to PRISMA-A than those of unstructured abstracts. No improvements in reporting of abstracts were found after the implementation of PRISMA-A in 2013.
    CONCLUSION: Adherence to PRISMA-A shows great potential for improvement. Therefore, authors, editors, and reviewers should be made aware of PRISMA-A by referring to it in the journal submission guidelines. As adherence to PRISMA-A increases with the number of words, journals should consider to increase the word limit to 250-300 words.
    Keywords:  effectiveness; methodological quality; reporting quality; systematic reviews
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.12.019
  11. Intern Emerg Med. 2022 Dec 27.
    Correction to: A tale of flawed e‑cigarette research undetected by defective peer review process.
    Riccardo Polosa, Konstantinos Farsalinos.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-022-03183-7
  12. Recenti Prog Med. 2023 Jan;114(1): 773-778
    [Who is the author of a scientific article?]
    Luca De Fiore.
      Authorship is increasingly discussed in international journals: in fact, the authorship and position of authors influence professional careers, the acquisition of funding, and individual and institutional reputation. International associations of editors of academic journals call for vigilance in cases of misconduct: ghostwriting and guest or gift authorship are frequent and penalise especially younger researchers and women. However, authorship is a concept in the making, strongly influenced not only by the social and ethical context, but also by technology. Today, artificial intelligence is an important aid for the editorial boards of academic journals. But it is likely to become a support for authors in the future as well, given the success of automatic writing software.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1701/3939.39225
  13. Tunis Med. 2022 juillet;100(7):100(7): 485-490
    Let's save the indexing of the journal "La Tunisie Médicale".
    Ahmed Ben Abdelaziz, Helmi Ben Saad, Lilia Zakhama.
      As part of the strategy to safeguard the indexing of the review «La Tunisie Médicale», and the consolidation of its scientific reputation, in Tunisia, the Maghreb and Africa, the new editorial team reported the lessons of a recent bibliometric audit for the management of manuscripts submitted to the journal «La Tunisie Médicale» during the period 2015-2019. During this five-year study, 2376 papers were received by the journal "La Tunisie Médicale", 87% of which came from Tunisia, particularly Cardiology, Pathological Anatomy and Cytology, and Pneumology. If 17% of the manuscripts persisted as «case reports», only 7% were summaries of the literature. During this five-year period, 923 reviewers were mobilized, and the acceptance rate was 32%. Based on this editorial audit and taking into consideration the difficulties of scientific publishing, the plan to safeguard the indexing of our national journal and its resilience should consist of the following measures: 1. Submission development scientific manuscripts, at a rate of 1000 papers per year, by the year 2025; 2. Ensure representation of all health science disciplines on the editorial team; 3. Prioritize the publication of research articles, having a better chance of citation; 4. Enrich the base of readers by more approved reviewers; 5. Establish a didactic reviewing model, centered on the development of authors' skills and their support.
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:28.