bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2024–02–18
fiveteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society



  1. Nature. 2024 Feb;626(7999): 480
      
    Keywords:  Publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00405-0
  2. J Arthroplasty. 2024 Jan 29. pii: S0883-5403(24)00064-0. [Epub ahead of print]
       BACKGROUND: As publishing with open access is becoming increasingly popular within orthopaedics, understanding the types of publishing options available and what each may deliver is critically important. Hybrid articles require a high article processing charge. Open journal articles have a lower fee, while closed license articles are freely accessible at no charge. Open repository articles are peer-reviewed manuscripts posted freely online. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between article type and resulting citations, social media attention, and readership in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) literature.
    METHODS: Open access TKA journal articles published since 2016 were found using the Altmetric Explorer Database. Data gathered included the Altmetric Attention Score (attention), Mendeley Readership Score (readership), and citations per article. Articles were grouped by type: open journal, hybrid, closed license, and open repository. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Tukey's analysis; α=0.05.
    RESULTS: A total of 9,606 publications were included. The open repository had the greatest mean citations (14.40), while open journal (9.55) had fewer than all other categories (P<0.001). Hybrid had the greatest mean attention (10.35), and open journal (6.16) had a lower mean attention than all other categories (P≤0.002). Open repository had the greatest mean readership (44.68), and open journal (34.00) had a lower mean readership than all other categories (P≤0.012). The mean publication fee for paid publication options was $1,792 USD (United States dollars).
    CONCLUSION: In open access TKA literature, free-to-publish open repositories had the greatest mean citations and readership. Free publication options, open repositories and closed licenses, had greater readership compared to paid publication options.
    Keywords:  article processing charge; hybrid publication; open access; orthopaedic surgery; publication modalities; total knee arthroplasty
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.01.040
  3. Nature. 2024 Feb 12.
      
    Keywords:  Publishing; Research management; Scientific community
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00397-x
  4. Diagn Pathol. 2024 Feb 12. 19(1): 31
      This letter concerns retracted papers published in the Journal of Diagnostic Pathology, where my name was misused as the author or corresponding author without my permission or knowledge. Considering that all misconducts were directed by an author during initial manuscripts' submissions, I opened a case in Iran's Cyber Police (FATA) to unravel the true identity of the submitting author. After Cyber Police's report revealed the true identity of the submitting author, the court started a thorough investigation and finally convicted the submitting author for identity fraud and data forgery through creating and using fake email addresses.
    Keywords:  Court; Identity fraud; Misconduct; Retraction; Submitting author
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13000-024-01459-4
  5. Nature. 2024 Feb 12.
      
    Keywords:  Ethics; Machine learning; Publishing; Scientific community; Software
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00372-6
  6. Lancet Neurol. 2024 Mar;pii: S1474-4422(24)00042-5. [Epub ahead of print]23(3): 228
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00042-5
  7. Curr Med Res Opin. 2024 Feb 14. 1-11
      Plain language resources (PLR) are lay summaries of clinical trial results or plain language summaries of publications, in digital/visual/language formats. They aim to provide accurate information in jargon-free, and easy-to-understand language that can meet the health information needs of the general public, especially patients and caregivers. These are typically developed by the study sponsors or investigators, or by national public health bodies, research hospitals, patient organizations, and non-profit organizations. While the usefulness of PLR seems unequivocal, they have never been analyzed from the perspective of ethics. In this commentary, we do so and reflect on whether PLR are categorically advantageous or if they solve certain issues but raise new problems at the same time. Ethical concerns that PLR can potentially address include but are not limited to individual and community level health literacy, patient empowerment and autonomy. We also highlight the ethical issues that PLR may potentially exacerbate, such as fair balanced presentation and interpretation of medical knowledge, positive publication bias, and equitable access to information. PLR are important resources for patients, with promising implications for individual as well as community health. However, they require appropriate oversight and standards to optimize their potential value. Hence, we also highlight recommendations and best practices from our reading of the literature, that aim to minimize these biases.
    Keywords:  Autonomy; community health; ethics; health literacy; plain language summaries; public health
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2308729
  8. Int J Med Robot. 2024 Feb;20(1): e2621
       BACKGROUND: Large language models (LLM) have unknown implications for medical research. This study assessed whether LLM-generated abstracts are distinguishable from human-written abstracts and to compare their perceived quality.
    METHODS: The LLM ChatGPT was used to generate 20 arthroplasty abstracts (AI-generated) based on full-text manuscripts, which were compared to originally published abstracts (human-written). Six blinded orthopaedic surgeons rated abstracts on overall quality, communication, and confidence in the authorship source. Authorship-confidence scores were compared to a test value representing complete inability to discern authorship.
    RESULTS: Modestly increased confidence in human authorship was observed for human-written abstracts compared with AI-generated abstracts (p = 0.028), though AI-generated abstract authorship-confidence scores were statistically consistent with inability to discern authorship (p = 0.999). Overall abstract quality was higher for human-written abstracts (p = 0.019).
    CONCLUSIONS: AI-generated abstracts' absolute authorship-confidence ratings demonstrated difficulty in discerning authorship but did not achieve the perceived quality of human-written abstracts. Caution is warranted in implementing LLMs into scientific writing.
    Keywords:  ChatGPT; artificial intelligence; large language models; medical literature; total hip arthroplasty; total knee arthroplasty
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2621
  9. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2024 Feb 16. 9(1): 2
      Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org ) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing ( www.dpjedi.org/resources ). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx ).
    Keywords:  Journal editing; Open science; Peer review; Scholarly publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00141-5
  10. Genes Cells. 2024 Feb 13.
      Our research activities would be better served if they were communicated in a manner that is openly accessible to the public and all researchers. The research we share is often limited to representative data included in research papers-science would be much more efficient if all reproducible research data were shared alongside detailed methods and protocols, in the paradigm called Open Science. On the other hand, one primary function of research journals is to select manuscripts of good quality, verify the authenticity of the data and its impact, and deliver to the appropriate audience for critical evaluation and verification. In the current paradigm, where publication in a subset of journals is intimately linked to research evaluation, a hypercompetitive "market" has emerged where authors compete to access a limited number of top-tier journals, leading to high rejection rates. Competition among publishers and scientific journals for market dominance resulted in an increase in both the number of journals and the cost of publishing and accessing scientific papers. Here we summarize the current problems and potential solutions from the development of AI technology discussed in the seminar at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Molecular Biology Society of Japan.
    Keywords:  APC/article processing charge; Open Access; Open Science; scientific publication; transformative agreement
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/gtc.13100
  11. J Dent Hyg. 2024 Feb;98(1): 78-82
      This short report guides the reader through the types of narrative reviews and describes the narrative review process from conception to completion. This report is an overview on the topic of literature reviews and serves to provide guidance regarding how and when to use a narrative review approach. Authors have many purposes for selecting the narrative review of the literature including introducing an original research manuscript, reviewing a critical topic for a scholarly journal, creating an introductory chapter for a thesis, or completing a classroom assignment. Each purpose may include a specific format and may require different components to be included in the research and writing process. This short report provides examples for each section of the narrative review research and writing process.
    Keywords:  information retrieval; literature reviews; narrative review; research strategies
  12. Nature. 2024 Feb;626(7999): 455-456
      
    Keywords:  Engineering; Sustainability
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00390-4