bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2023–04–23
twenty-two papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. Outsider bias: how your name influences the peer review process.
  2. Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against open-access charges.
  3. Overcoming the gender bias in ecology and evolution: is the double-anonymized peer review an effective pathway over time?
  4. From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing.
  5. Balkan Medical Journal Policy on the Use of Chatbots in Scientific Publications.
  6. Estimating social bias in data sharing behaviours: an open science experiment.
  7. Does chatGPT (or any other artificial intelligence language tool) deserve to be included in authorship list?
  8. Bias, quality and reporting in health research: differences and tools for appraisal.
  9. High retraction rate of Chinese articles: it is time to do something about academic misconduct.
  10. Rate my Editor.
  11. Retracted publications in autism research are mostly concerned with ethical misconduct.
  12. Importance and use of guidelines to report main types of studies in medical research.
  13. Completeness of Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Vascular Surgery.
  14. Bad science: time for our community to do better.
  15. Reporting Standards for Diagnostic Testing: Guidance for Authors From Editors of Respiratory, Sleep, and Critical Care Journals.
  16. Case Reports: The Art of Writing, the Importance of Publishing it and Avoiding Facing Rejection.
  17. Reporting of retrospective registration in clinical trial publications: a cross-sectional study of German trials.
  18. Artificial intelligence applications and scholarly publication in orthopedic surgery.
  19. Current challenges for researchers during the process of submission and publication.
  20. How I respond to peer reviewer comments.
  21. Why open-source generative AI models are an ethical way forward for science.
  22. Decision letters from other journals.
  1. Postgrad Med J. 2022 Sep 19. pii: pmj-2022-142046. [Epub ahead of print]
    Outsider bias: how your name influences the peer review process.
    Sawsan Abdel-Razig, Halah Ibrahim.
      
    Keywords:  Education and training; Ethics; Statistics & research methods
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/postmj/pmj-2022-142046
  2. Nature. 2023 Apr 21.
    Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against open-access charges.
    Katharine Sanderson.
      
    Keywords:  Publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-01391-5
  3. PeerJ. 2023 ;11 e15186
    Overcoming the gender bias in ecology and evolution: is the double-anonymized peer review an effective pathway over time?
    Cibele Cássia-Silva, Barbbara Silva Rocha, Luisa Fernanda Liévano-Latorre, Mariane Brom Sobreiro, Luisa Maria Diele-Viegas.
      Male researchers dominate scientific production in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However, potential mechanisms to avoid this gender imbalance remain poorly explored in STEM, including ecology and evolution areas. In the last decades, changes in the peer-review process towards double-anonymized (DA) have increased among ecology and evolution (EcoEvo) journals. Using comprehensive data on articles from 18 selected EcoEvo journals with an impact factor >1, we tested the effect of the DA peer-review process in female-leading (i.e., first and senior authors) articles. We tested whether the representation of female-leading authors differs between double and single-anonymized (SA) peer-reviewed journals. Also, we tested if the adoption of the DA by previous SA journals has increased the representativeness of female-leading authors over time. We found that publications led by female authors did not differ between DA and SA journals. Moreover, female-leading articles did not increase after changes from SA to DA peer-review. Tackling female underrepresentation in science is a complex task requiring many interventions. Still, our results highlight that adopting the DA peer-review system alone could be insufficient in fostering gender equality in EcoEvo scientific publications. Ecologists and evolutionists understand how diversity is important to ecosystems' resilience in facing environmental changes. The question remaining is: why is it so difficult to promote and keep this "diversity" in addition to equity and inclusion in the academic environment? We thus argue that all scientists, mentors, and research centers must be engaged in promoting solutions to gender bias by fostering diversity, inclusion, and affirmative measures.
    Keywords:  Gender diversity; Gender equality; Inclusion; Triple-anonymized policy
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15186
  4. Biol Sport. 2023 Apr;40(2): 615-622
    From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing.
    Ismail Dergaa, Karim Chamari, Piotr Zmijewski, Helmi Ben Saad.
      Natural language processing (NLP) has been studied in computing for decades. Recent technological advancements have led to the development of sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI) models, such as Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT). These models can perform a range of language tasks and generate human-like responses, which offers exciting prospects for academic efficiency. This manuscript aims at (i) exploring the potential benefits and threats of ChatGPT and other NLP technologies in academic writing and research publications; (ii) highlights the ethical considerations involved in using these tools, and (iii) consider the impact they may have on the authenticity and credibility of academic work. This study involved a literature review of relevant scholarly articles published in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Scopus as quartile 1. The search used keywords such as "ChatGPT," "AI-generated text," "academic writing," and "natural language processing." The analysis was carried out using a quasi-qualitative approach, which involved reading and critically evaluating the sources and identifying relevant data to support the research questions. The study found that ChatGPT and other NLP technologies have the potential to enhance academic writing and research efficiency. However, their use also raises concerns about the impact on the authenticity and credibility of academic work. The study highlights the need for comprehensive discussions on the potential use, threats, and limitations of these tools, emphasizing the importance of ethical and academic principles, with human intelligence and critical thinking at the forefront of the research process. This study highlights the need for comprehensive debates and ethical considerations involved in their use. The study also recommends that academics exercise caution when using these tools and ensure transparency in their use, emphasizing the importance of human intelligence and critical thinking in academic work.
    Keywords:  Artificial Intelligence; Chatbot; Deep Learning; Google Bard; Higher Education; LLM; LLaMA; Machine Learning; NLM; NLP; Natural Language Processing; Paperpal; Peer Review; QuillBot; Rayyan; Research; Sports Medicine
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623
  5. Balkan Med J. 2023 Apr 17.
    Balkan Medical Journal Policy on the Use of Chatbots in Scientific Publications.
    Zafer Koçak, Servet Altay.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.4274/balkanmedj.galenos.2023.17042023
  6. Sci Data. 2023 Apr 21. 10(1): 233
    Estimating social bias in data sharing behaviours: an open science experiment.
    Claudia Acciai, Jesper W Schneider, Mathias W Nielsen.
      Open data sharing is critical for scientific progress. Yet, many authors refrain from sharing scientific data, even when they have promised to do so. Through a preregistered, randomized audit experiment (N = 1,634), we tested possible ethnic, gender and status-related bias in scientists' data-sharing willingness. 814 (54%) authors of papers where data were indicated to be 'available upon request' responded to our data requests, and 226 (14%) either shared or indicated willingness to share all or some data. While our preregistered hypotheses regarding bias in data-sharing willingness were not confirmed, we observed systematically lower response rates for data requests made by putatively Chinese treatments compared to putatively Anglo-Saxon treatments. Further analysis indicated a theoretically plausible heterogeneity in the causal effect of ethnicity on data-sharing. In interaction analyses, we found indications of lower responsiveness and data-sharing willingness towards male but not female data requestors with Chinese names. These disparities, which likely arise from stereotypic beliefs about male Chinese requestors' trustworthiness and deservingness, impede scientific progress by preventing the free circulation of knowledge.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02129-8
  7. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2023 ;16(1): 435-437
    Does chatGPT (or any other artificial intelligence language tool) deserve to be included in authorship list?
    Mohamad Amin Pourhoseingholi, Mohammad Reza Hatamnejad, Ali Solhpour.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.22037/ghfbb.v16i1.2747
  8. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023 Apr 19. pii: bmjebm-2023-112260. [Epub ahead of print]
    Bias, quality and reporting in health research: differences and tools for appraisal.
    Luis Ignacio Garegnani.
      
    Keywords:  evidence-based practice; health services research; publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112260
  9. Postgrad Med J. 2022 Sep 01. 98(1163): 653-654
    High retraction rate of Chinese articles: it is time to do something about academic misconduct.
    Yu Xiao, Jia Chen, Xiao-Hong Wu, Qin-Ming Qiu.
      
    Keywords:  medical education & training; medical ethics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-140853
  10. Genes Dev. 2023 Jan 01. 37(1-2): 14-15
    Rate my Editor.
    Titia de Lange.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.350445.123
  11. Health Info Libr J. 2023 Apr 19.
    Retracted publications in autism research are mostly concerned with ethical misconduct.
    Deborah H Charbonneau, Leah R Ketcheson.
       BACKGROUND: As the prevalence of autism appears to increase, more research to guide effective diagnosis and intervention practices is needed. Findings disseminated through peer-reviewed publications are critical, but the number of retractions continues to rise. An understanding of retracted publications is imperative to ensure the body of evidence is corrected and current.
    OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this analysis were to summarize key characteristics of retracted publications in autism research, examine the length of time between publication and retraction, and assess the extent journals are adhering to publishing ethical guidelines for reporting retracted articles.
    METHODS: We searched five databases through 2021 (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch).
    RESULTS: A total of 25 retracted articles were included in the analysis. Ethical misconduct accounted for the majority of retractions rather than scientific error. The shortest time to retraction was 2 months and the longest length was 144 months.
    DISCUSSION: The time lag between publication and retraction since 2018 has improved considerably. Nineteen of the articles had retraction notices (76%), whereas six articles did not have a notice (24%).
    CONCLUSION: These findings summarize errors of previous retractions and illuminate opportunities for researchers, journal publishers and librarians to learn from retracted publications.
    Keywords:  ethics; mental health; publishers and publishing; scholarly communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12482
  12. Cir Cir. 2023 ;91(2): 277-283
    Importance and use of guidelines to report main types of studies in medical research.
    Marlene I Fragoso-Mendoza, Rocío Dávila-Mendoza, Geovani López-Ortiz.
      Medical care must be supported by research that meets reliable, valid, ethical, and reproducible principles. However, an essential fraction of research carried out in the medical field is inadequately reported due to omitting relevant information when it is published. This reduces their impact and the possibility that other researchers can realize critical appraisal, thereby compromising their application within medical practice. Because of this, guidelines have been developed to reduce this problem; their purpose is to increase research reports' methodological quality, transparency, validity, and reliability. Despite their importance, incorporating these guidelines in various journals and the knowledge and use by a significant part of the medical community is limited. In this context, this article aims to synthesize the main guidelines for reporting research in medicine.
    Keywords:  Artículo de revista; Calidad de la investigación; Educación médica; Guidelines; Guías; Journal article; Medical education; Medical writing; Redacción médica; Research quality
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.24875/CIRU.22000122
  13. J Vasc Surg. 2023 Apr 15. pii: S0741-5214(23)01035-2. [Epub ahead of print]
    Completeness of Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Vascular Surgery.
    A P Javidan, J Alaichi, Y Nassar, A Li, K Y Balta, F Naji.
       OBJECTIVES: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses are essential in informing clinical guidelines and decision-making. Complete reporting of SRs through compliance to the PRISMA guidelines promotes transparency, reproducibility, and consistency across the literature. The purpose of this meta-epidemiological study is to assess the completeness of reporting of SRs in the vascular surgery literature.
    METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were used to search through four major vascular surgery journals and four high impact general medical journals for SRs published between 2018 and October 2022 evaluating clinical treatments for any pathology treated by a vascular surgeon. Data screening and extraction were conducted in duplicate. The reporting completeness of each included SR was measured with reference to the 27-item PRISMA checklist and methodological quality was evaluated using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Parametric tests were used to evaluate for associations between PRISMA score and study funding, protocol registration, publication in a higher impact factor journal, and AMSTAR 2 score. Protocol available online: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VBC5N RESULTS: Of 1653 articles captured in the initial search, 162 SRs were included in the final analysis. All SRs had more than one incomplete PRISMA item. The mean PRISMA score was 21.2/27 (SD 2.9, 78.5% compliance) and the mean AMSTAR 2 score was 11.7/16 (SD 1.9, 73%). SRs that had a prospectively registered protocol had a higher PRISMA score (22.9 vs. 20.6, p < 0.001) as did those that were published in higher impact factor journals had a higher PRISMA score (23.3 vs. 21.0, p = 0.017). There was a large positive correlation between a SR's PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 scores (Pearson r = 0.654, 95% CI: 0.546 - 0.742). There were no associations between PRISMA score and publication year (p = 0.067) or funding status (p = 0.076).
    CONCLUSION: Overall, the reporting of SRMAs in vascular surgery is less than ideal, with several key items being consistently underreported. Prospective registration and AMSTAR 2 scores are positively associated with improved reporting. Authors, reviewers, and journal editors should consider these findings moving forward to encourage completeness of SR reporting. Raising awareness surrounding the value of complete reporting of SRs can aid in enhancing the quality of evidence and journals should consider these findings in methods used to promote SR reporting.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2023.04.009
  14. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2023 Apr 17.
    Bad science: time for our community to do better.
    Simon C Langley-Evans.
      
    Keywords:  nutrition; predatory journals; quality; research
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/jhn.13165
  15. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol. 2023 Apr 10.
    Reporting Standards for Diagnostic Testing: Guidance for Authors From Editors of Respiratory, Sleep, and Critical Care Journals.
    David E Ost, David J Feller-Kopman, Anne Gonzalez, Horiana B Grosu, Felix Herth, Peter Mazzone, John E S Park, José M Porcel, Samira Shojaee, Ioana Tsiligianni, Anil Vachani, Jonathan Bernstein, Richard Branson, Patrick A Flume, Cezmi A Akdis, Martin Kolb, Esther Barreiro Portela, Alan Smyth.
      Diagnostic testing is fundamental to medicine. However, studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine vary significantly in terms of their methodology, definitions, and reporting of results. This has led to often conflicting or ambiguous results. To address this issue, a group of 20 respiratory journal editors worked to develop reporting standards for studies of diagnostic testing based on a rigorous methodology to guide authors, peer reviewers, and researchers when conducting studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine. Four key areas are covered, including defining the reference standard of truth, measures of dichotomous test performance when used for dichotomous outcomes, measures of multichotomous test performance for dichotomous outcomes, and what constitutes a useful definition of diagnostic yield. The importance of using contingency tables for reporting results is addressed with examples from the literature. A practical checklist is provided as well for reporting studies of diagnostic testing.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/LBR.0000000000000920
  16. J Orthop Case Rep. 2022 Jun;12(6): 106-107
    Case Reports: The Art of Writing, the Importance of Publishing it and Avoiding Facing Rejection.
    Kunal Aneja, Ashok Shyam.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.13107/jocr.2021.v12.i06.2888
  17. BMJ Open. 2023 Apr 18. 13(4): e069553
    Reporting of retrospective registration in clinical trial publications: a cross-sectional study of German trials.
    Martin Haslberger, Stefanie Gestrich, Daniel Strech.
       OBJECTIVE: Prospective registration has been widely implemented and accepted as a best practice in clinical research, but retrospective registration is still commonly found. We assessed to what extent retrospective registration is reported transparently in journal publications and investigated factors associated with transparent reporting.
    DESIGN: We used a dataset of trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov or Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, with a German University Medical Center as the lead centre, completed in 2009-2017, and with a corresponding peer-reviewed results publication. We extracted all registration statements from results publications of retrospectively registered trials and assessed whether they mention or justify the retrospective registration. We analysed associations of retrospective registration and reporting thereof with registration number reporting, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) membership/-following and industry sponsorship using χ2 or Fisher exact test.
    RESULTS: In the dataset of 1927 trials with a corresponding results publication, 956 (53.7%) were retrospectively registered. Of those, 2.2% (21) explicitly report the retrospective registration in the abstract and 3.5% (33) in the full text. In 2.1% (20) of publications, authors provide an explanation for the retrospective registration in the full text. Registration numbers were significantly underreported in abstracts of retrospectively registered trials compared with prospectively registered trials. Publications in ICMJE member journals did not have statistically significantly higher rates of both prospective registration and disclosure of retrospective registration, and publications in journals claiming to follow ICMJE recommendations showed statistically significantly lower rates compared with non-ICMJE-following journals. Industry sponsorship of trials was significantly associated with higher rates of prospective registration, but not with transparent registration reporting.
    CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to ICMJE guidance, retrospective registration is disclosed and explained only in a small number of retrospectively registered studies. Disclosure of the retrospective nature of the registration would require a brief statement in the manuscript and could be easily implemented by journals.
    Keywords:  Clinical trials; Medical ethics; Statistics & research methods
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069553
  18. J Orthop Res. 2023 Apr 17.
    Artificial intelligence applications and scholarly publication in orthopedic surgery.
    Seth S Leopold, Fares S Haddad, Linda J Sandell, Marc Swiontkowski.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.25566
  19. Postgrad Med J. 2022 Jun 01. 98(1160): 405-407
    Current challenges for researchers during the process of submission and publication.
    Asim Kichloo, Michael Albosta, Hazique Koul, Michael Aljadah, Farah Wani, Rehana Qadir.
      
    Keywords:  medical education & training; statistics & research methods
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-140861
  20. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2023 Feb;7(2): 100120
    How I respond to peer reviewer comments.
    Mary Cushman.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpth.2023.100120
  21. Nature. 2023 Apr;616(7957): 413
    Why open-source generative AI models are an ethical way forward for science.
    Arthur Spirling.
      
    Keywords:  Ethics; Machine learning; Scientific community; Technology
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-01295-4
  22. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2023 Apr 17. pii: S1198-743X(23)00184-2. [Epub ahead of print]
    Decision letters from other journals.
    Julia Friedman.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2023.04.013
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:28.