bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2024–07–21
35 papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. BMJ Commission on the Future of Academic Medicine must challenge medical publishers to deliver value.
  2. Who should finance science? A consideration about publication costs.
  3. Why do Journals Continue to Publish Single-Authored Systematic Reviews? Comment on Pacheco et al., 2023.
  4. What is it like to attend a predatory conference?
  5. Oops! ... They did it again-The Reasons Behind so Many Retractions of Scientific Articles.
  6. Activity for CUREs to increase student understanding and application of responsible authorship and publication practices.
  7. Clinical Nurse Peer Review: A Process That Works for the Nurse and the Organization.
  8. AI Writes about Itself: A scientific paper authored by an algorithm raises unexpected ethical questions.
  9. Artificial Intelligence Content Detector in Paper Writing: Beyond the Detection.
  10. Generative Artificial Intelligence: A New Frontier of Scientific Misconduct?
  11. AI-generated text in otolaryngology publications: a comparative analysis before and after the release of ChatGPT.
  12. How Artificial Intelligence is changing scientific publishing? Unrequested advices for young researchers II.
  13. Generative AI makes for better scientific writing - but beware the pitfalls.
  14. Chatbot Invasion: Generative AI has infiltrated scientific publishing.
  15. Improving how orthopedic journals report research outcomes based on sex and gender*,†.
  16. Ethical requirements of instructions for authors of complementary and alternative medicine journals: a cross-sectional study.
  17. The OHStat Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: explanation and elaboration.
  18. Perceptions of journal editors on the use of eponyms in anatomical publishing: the need for compromise.
  19. Writing case reports: Sharing clinical experience to inform practice.
  20. Commentary: Expanding the vision of Registered Reports for qualitative mental health research: A response and extension to 'Misaligned incentives in mental health research - the case for Registered Reports', Baldwin (2023).
  21. Research integrity in Instructions for Authors in Japanese medical journals using ICMJE Recommendations: A descriptive literature study.
  22. Evaluation of adherence to STARD for Abstracts in a diverse sample of diagnostic accuracy abstracts published in 2012 and 2019 reveals suboptimal reporting practices.
  23. Words matter: An update to the AJT Instructions to Authors with inclusive language guidance.
  24. Still to ARRIVE at adequate reporting of orthodontic studies involving animal models.
  25. Reporting Minority Race and Ethnicity in Cardiovascular and Thoracic Journals.
  26. Scientific experimental articles are modernist stories.
  27. Reporting Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence Studies in Healthcare (for Both Conventional and Large Language Models): What's New in 2024.
  28. Open Access Databases of Craniofacial Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans are Vital for Advancements in Artificial Intelligence.
  29. Presentation and publication skills: How to prepare a scientific poster.
  30. ODIN: Open Data In Neurophysiology: Advancements, Solutions & Challenges.
  31. Scientific writing: how to get published.
  32. Preprint Servers.
  33. Parent attitudes towards data sharing in developmental science.
  34. Political bias in interpreting social media for forensic purposes: An introductory editorial essay.
  35. How AI Generates Images from Text: Algorithms use probability to predict what they should show.
  1. BMJ. 2024 Jul 17. 386 q1572
    BMJ Commission on the Future of Academic Medicine must challenge medical publishers to deliver value.
    Stephen H Bradley.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1572
  2. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2024 ;pii: S0004-27492024000400100. [Epub ahead of print]87(4): 1010
    Who should finance science? A consideration about publication costs.
    Newton Kara-Junior.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.2024-1010
  3. J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Jul 11. pii: S0895-4356(24)00219-1. [Epub ahead of print] 111463
    Why do Journals Continue to Publish Single-Authored Systematic Reviews? Comment on Pacheco et al., 2023.
    Abdulqadir J Nashwan, Ahmed Y Azzam, Nabila Chaabna, George V Joy, Jibin Kunjavara.
      
    Keywords:  Data extraction; Evidence-based Practice; Meta-analyses; Research Methodology; Single-authored; Systematic Reviews
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111463
  4. Nature. 2024 Jul;631(8022): 921-923
    What is it like to attend a predatory conference?
    Christine Ro.
      
    Keywords:  Careers; Conferences and meetings; Publishing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02358-w
  5. Arch Med Res. 2024 Jul 18. pii: S0188-4409(24)00108-5. [Epub ahead of print]55(7): 103056
    Oops! ... They did it again-The Reasons Behind so Many Retractions of Scientific Articles.
    Lucindo José Quintans-Júnior, Paulo Ricardo Martins-Filho.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcmed.2024.103056
  6. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2024 Jul 16. e0000924
    Activity for CUREs to increase student understanding and application of responsible authorship and publication practices.
    Kristy J Wilson, Alexis Mitchel.
      Professional development of scientists is enhanced by training students in responsible conduct of research earlier in their careers. One aspect of responsible conduct of research is authorship ethics, which concerns granting of credit to those who make intellectual contributions to the research. The activity discussed in this article emphasizes how authorship ethics can be integrated with Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) and includes an adaption that could also be used for independent research students. The activity allows students to reflect upon inequalities and problems seen in scientific authorship, including gender bias, failure to credit effort (ghostwriters), and inclusion of authors that did not meaningfully contribute to the work (honorary/gift authorship). Themes seen in student reflections on how they could demonstrate ethics in authorship included: determining authorship by contribution, appropriate attributions on curriculum vitas (CV) and posters, different credit levels, understanding authorship criteria, and tracking contributions. Themes seen in student reflections on the importance of authorship were proper authorship credit distribution, authorship impacting career opportunities, and accountability in research. In the activity, students also created attributions for a poster to be presented from their research. We found that most students were able to create attributions that were correctly formatted, included the same authors, and positioned authors in the same order as other group members, matching what was presented on the finalized poster. We found that students' reflection on authorship and this professionalization of their activities in their CURE led to modest increases in their view of themselves as scientists.
    Keywords:  CURE; attribution; authorship; ethics; presentation; responsible conduct of research
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00009-24
  7. J Nurs Adm. 2024 Jul-Aug 01;54(7-8):54(7-8): 416-421
    Clinical Nurse Peer Review: A Process That Works for the Nurse and the Organization.
    Stacie J Ethington, Jacquelynn M Edwards, Christina D Reames.
      Clinical peer review is a strategy that engages nurses in elevating not only the safety of patients but also their influence on practice. There is little guidance in the literature about how to operationalize peer review in a way that promotes just culture. In a postpandemic era, where nurse engagement and retention are low, this article describes how to implement and measure the impact of clinical peer review on practice trends and empower nurses to influence system-wide change.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000001450
  8. Sci Am. 2022 Sep 01. 327(3): 70
    AI Writes about Itself: A scientific paper authored by an algorithm raises unexpected ethical questions.
    Almira Osmanovic Thunström.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0922-70
  9. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Jul 17.
    Artificial Intelligence Content Detector in Paper Writing: Beyond the Detection.
    Shigeki Matsubara.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-15840-6
  10. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2024 Apr 26. pii: S0360-3016(24)00441-3. [Epub ahead of print]
    Generative Artificial Intelligence: A New Frontier of Scientific Misconduct?
    Ling He, Hannah Hausman, Frank Pajonk.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.03.026
  11. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024 Jul 17.
    AI-generated text in otolaryngology publications: a comparative analysis before and after the release of ChatGPT.
    Jonathan M Carnino, Nicholas Y K Chong, Henry Bayly, Lindsay R Salvati, Hardeep S Tiwana, Jessica R Levi.
       PURPOSE: This study delves into the broader implications of artificial intelligence (AI) text generation technologies, including large language models (LLMs) and chatbots, on the scientific literature of otolaryngology. By observing trends in AI-generated text within published otolaryngology studies, this investigation aims to contextualize the impact of AI-driven tools that are reshaping scientific writing and communication.
    METHODS: Text from 143 original articles published in JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery was collected, representing periods before and after ChatGPT's release in November 2022. The text from each article's abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion were entered into ZeroGPT.com to estimate the percentage of AI-generated content. Statistical analyses, including T-Tests and Fligner-Killeen's tests, were conducted using R.
    RESULTS: A significant increase was observed in the mean percentage of AI-generated text post-ChatGPT release, especially in the abstract (from 34.36 to 46.53%, p = 0.004), introduction (from 32.43 to 45.08%, p = 0.010), and discussion sections (from 15.73 to 25.03%, p = 0.015). Publications of authors from non-English speaking countries demonstrated a higher percentage of AI-generated text.
    CONCLUSION: This study found that the advent of ChatGPT has significantly impacted writing practices among researchers publishing in JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, raising concerns over the accuracy of AI-created content and potential misinformation risks. This manuscript highlights the evolving dynamics between AI technologies, scientific communication, and publication integrity, emphasizing the urgent need for continued research in this dynamic field. The findings also suggest an increasing reliance on AI tools like ChatGPT, raising questions about their broader implications for scientific publishing.
    Keywords:  Artificial intelligence (AI); ChatGPT; Ethics; Manuscript drafting
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-08834-3
  12. Pulmonology. 2024 Jul 13. pii: S2531-0437(24)00058-8. [Epub ahead of print]
    How Artificial Intelligence is changing scientific publishing? Unrequested advices for young researchers II.
    Stefano Mazzoleni, Nicolino Ambrosino.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pulmoe.2024.04.011
  13. Nature. 2024 Jul;631(8021): 505
    Generative AI makes for better scientific writing - but beware the pitfalls.
    Zhongkai Liao, Congcong Zhang.
      
    Keywords:  Lab life; Machine learning; Scientific community
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02319-3
  14. Sci Am. 2024 Jul 01. 331(1): 16
    Chatbot Invasion: Generative AI has infiltrated scientific publishing.
    Chris Stokel-Walker.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican072024-7bVpuVjnKZbJ8IQrkgMTlR
  15. Spine J. 2024 Aug;pii: S1529-9430(24)00215-8. [Epub ahead of print]24(8): 1339-1341
    Improving how orthopedic journals report research outcomes based on sex and gender*,†.
    Sex and Gender Research in Orthopaedic Journals Group(1)
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.04.030
  16. BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Jul 13. 25(1): 77
    Ethical requirements of instructions for authors of complementary and alternative medicine journals: a cross-sectional study.
    Chenyu Ren, Yixuan Li, Peipei Du, Xuebin Zhang, Wanjun Xue, Chi Zhang.
       BACKGROUND: Medical research in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has increased recently, raising ethical concerns about the moral status of CAM. Medical academic journals are responsible for conducting ethical review (ER) of manuscripts to protect the interests of human subjects and to make ethical results available before deciding to publish. However, there has been no systematic analysis of the ER in CAM journals. This study is aim to evaluate the current status of ethical requirements and compliance in CAM journals.
    METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study. We reviewed instructions for authors (IFAs) of CAM journals included in the Journal Citation Reports (2021) ( https://jcr.clarivate.com ) for general information and requirements for ER. We also browsed the manuscripts regarding randomized controlled trials published by CAM journals in Q1 and Q2 section from January to June, 2023, to check the actual situation of ethical requirement. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were used for statistical analysis.
    RESULTS: 27 journals and 68 manuscripts were ultimately included. 92.6% (25/27) IFAs included keywords of ER, indicating the presence of ethical considerations. However, no specific ER was required for CAM (n = 0). We categorized journals by Geographic origin, JCR section, Year of electronic JCR, Types of studies, % of OA Gold to explore the factors that could influence CAM journals to have certain ethical review policies. The results showed there was no statistical significance in certain ethical review policy in any classification of journals (p > 0.05). All RCT manuscripts included in the study generally met the requirements of the published journals for ethical review.
    CONCLUSIONS: All IFAs discussed ER, but the content was scattered, unfocused, and there were no specific ER requirements regarding CAM. Although the manuscripts basically met the requirements of the journal, it was not possible to get closer to the process of ER in the manuscript. To ensure full implementation of these policies in the future, CAM journals should require authors to provide more details, or to form a list of items necessary for CAM ethical review.
    Keywords:  Complementary and alternative medicine; Instructions for authors; Integrative and complementary medicine; Medical ethics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01077-1
  17. J Am Dent Assoc. 2024 Jul 12. pii: S0002-8177(24)00316-7. [Epub ahead of print]
    The OHStat Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies and Clinical Trials in Oral Health Research: explanation and elaboration.
    Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research
      Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising research. Yet, evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-empaneled a group of authors to develop methodological and statistical reporting guidelines identifying the minimum information needed to document and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHstat Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The final version was subsequently approved by the Task Force in September 2021, submitted for journal review in 2022, and revised in 2023. The checklist consists of 48 guidelines: 5 for introductory information, 17 for methods, 13 for statistical analysis, 6 for results, and 7 for interpretation; 7 are specific to clinical trials. Each of these guidelines identifies relevant information, explains its importance, and often describes best practices. The checklist was published in multiple journals. The article was published simultaneously in JDR Clinical and Translational Research, the Journal of the American Dental Association, and the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Completed checklists should accompany manuscripts submitted for publication to these and other oral health journals to help authors, journal editors, and reviewers verify that the manuscript provides the information necessary to adequately document and evaluate the research.
    Keywords:  Publishing/∗standards; comparative studies; research design/standards; retrospective studies; statistical data interpretation
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2024.06.007
  18. Anat Sci Int. 2024 Jul 17.
    Perceptions of journal editors on the use of eponyms in anatomical publishing: the need for compromise.
    Nicholas Bacci, Erin Hutchinson, Beverley Kramer, Brendon Kurt Billings.
      While arguments have been made both for and against the value of anatomical eponyms, limited research exists regarding their use by anatomists. As the editors of the principal international anatomy journals have purview and control of terminology in anatomical journals, their perceptions regarding the relevance, ethics and inclusivity of eponym use in anatomy and in publishing in anatomical journals were investigated. A validated, confidential and anonymized self-administered questionnaire which included open-ended questions was distributed to the 22 Editor-in-Chiefs/Senior Editors of anatomical journals. Of the 16 (73%) editors who responded to the survey, only 56% were aware that eponyms had been censured since the time of the 1895 Nomina Anatomica. The majority of responding editors found the use of Latin- and Greek-derived terms more valuable when communicating with students and peers, but also thought eponyms were acceptable in manuscripts submitted to their journals. Thirteen (81%) of the responding editors agreed that eponyms play a vital role in the history of anatomy, and some thought they were important for discussing bioethics concepts. However, 62.5% felt that there were valid reasons for their discontinuation. Half of the respondents did not consider the continued use of eponyms an ethical concern. Responding editors of anatomical journals prefer the use of Latin- and Greek- derived terms when interacting with other anatomists and students. However, the continued use of eponyms was seen as an important opportunity for discussion on the history and ethics of anatomy.
    Keywords:  Anatomy; Eponyms; Ethics; Publishing; Terminology
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-024-00789-z
  19. Case Rep Womens Health. 2024 Jun;42 e00621
    Writing case reports: Sharing clinical experience to inform practice.
    Nnabuike Chibuoke Ngene, Margaret Rees.
      
    Keywords:  Case reports; Journal article; Manuscript; Medical writing; Publication ethics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crwh.2024.e00621
  20. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2024 Jul 18.
    Commentary: Expanding the vision of Registered Reports for qualitative mental health research: A response and extension to 'Misaligned incentives in mental health research - the case for Registered Reports', Baldwin (2023).
    Ola Demkowicz, Jo Hickman Dunne.
      There is a growing exploration of how Registered Reports can benefit individual researchers and wider research fields as part of a wider shift towards open research principles and practices. In 'Misaligned incentives in mental health research - the case for Registered Reports', Baldwin examines this in the context of mental health research, arguing that Registered Reports (RRs) can be a valuable solution to misaligned incentive structures in the field. However, this original piece was generally inclined towards how such incentives and the use of RRs can play out in the context of quantitative research. Such reflection is valuable, but to examine the case for RRs in mental health research as a field, we must also explore such practices within the context of qualitative research. In this commentary, we therefore expand and reframe this discussion to make the case for RRs in qualitative mental health research. We explore the place for qualitative research in the mental health research field and examine possibilities for how RRs fit within principles and practices in such methods. We discuss the various benefits and challenges of RRs in qualitative research, reflecting on our experiences as authors and reviewers of qualitative RRs and exploring how research infrastructure can facilitate engagement with this publishing approach.
    Keywords:  Registered Reports; open research; qualitative research
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.14039
  21. PLoS One. 2024 ;19(7): e0305707
    Research integrity in Instructions for Authors in Japanese medical journals using ICMJE Recommendations: A descriptive literature study.
    Shiho Koizumi, Kazuki Ide, Carl Becker, Tomoe Uchida, Miho Ishizaki, Akane Hashimoto, Shota Suzuki, Makiko Sano, Mayumi Toyama, Yoshitaka Nishikawa, Hiroshi Okada, Yoshimitsu Takahashi, Takeo Nakayama.
       BACKGROUND: The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has published Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. These provide a global standard for writing and editing medical articles, including research integrity. However, no study has examined the research integrity-related content of Japanese medical journals' Instructions for Authors. We therefore compared research integrity content in ICMJE member journals with those in the English- and Japanese-language journals of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences (JAMS).
    MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a descriptive literature study. We obtained Instructions for Authors from English- and Japanese-language journals listed on the JAMS website and the ICMJE member journals listed on the ICMJE website as of September 1, 2021. We compared the presence of 20 topics (19 in the ICMJE Recommendations plus compliance with ICMJE) in the Instructions for Authors, and analyzed the content of the conflict of interest disclosure.
    RESULTS: We evaluated 12 ICMJE member journals, and 82 English-language and 99 Japanese-language subcommittee journals. The median number of topics covered was 10.5 for ICMJE member journals, 10 for English-language journals, and three for Japanese-language journals. Compliance with ICMJE was mentioned by 10 (83%) ICMJE member journals, 75 (91%) English-language journals, and 29 (29%) Japanese-language journals. The ICMJE Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Form was requested by seven (64%) ICMJE member journals, 15 (18%) English-language journals, and one (1%) Japanese-language journal.
    CONCLUSIONS: Although the topics in the JAMS English-language journals resembled those in the ICMJE member journals, the median value of ICMJE-related topic inclusion was approximately one-third lower in JAMS Japanese-language journals than in ICMJE member journals. It is hoped that Japanese-language journals whose conflict of interest disclosure policies differ from ICMJE standards will adopt international standards to deter misconduct and ensure publication quality.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305707
  22. J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Jul 12. pii: S0895-4356(24)00215-4. [Epub ahead of print] 111459
    Evaluation of adherence to STARD for Abstracts in a diverse sample of diagnostic accuracy abstracts published in 2012 and 2019 reveals suboptimal reporting practices.
    Constance Dubois, Haben Dawit, Daniël A Korevaar, Yasaman Vali, Alma Al Sibaaie, Robert A Frank, Matthew D F McInnes, Chris Hyde, Patrick M Bossuyt, Jérémie F Cohen.
       OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the completeness of reporting in a sample of abstracts on diagnostic accuracy studies before and after the release of STARD for Abstracts in 2017.
    METHODS: We included 278 diagnostic accuracy abstracts published in 2012 (N=138) and 2019 (N=140) and indexed in EMBASE. We analyzed their adherence to 10 items of the 11-item STARD for Abstracts checklist and explored variability in reporting across abstract characteristics using multivariable Poisson modeling.
    RESULTS: Most of the 278 abstracts (75%) were published in discipline-specific journals, with a median impact factor of 2.9 (IQR: 1.9-3.7). The majority (41%) of abstracts reported on imaging tests. Overall, a mean of 5.4/10 (SD: 1.4) STARD for Abstracts items was reported (range: 1.2-9.7). Items reported in less than one-third of abstracts included 'eligible patient demographics' (24%), 'setting of recruitment' (30%), 'method of enrolment' (18%), 'estimates of precision for accuracy measures' (26%), and 'protocol registration details' (4%). We observed substantial variability in reporting across several abstract characteristics, with higher adherence associated with the use of a structured abstract, no journal limit for abstract word count, abstract word count above the median, one-gate enrolment design, and prospective data collection. There was no evidence of an increase in the number of reported items between 2012 and 2019 (5.2 vs. 5.5 items; adjusted reporting ratio 1.04 [95%CI: 0.98-1.10]).
    CONCLUSION: This sample of diagnostic accuracy abstracts revealed suboptimal reporting practices, without improvement between 2012 and 2019. The test evaluation field could benefit from targeted knowledge translation strategies to improve completeness of reporting in abstracts.
    Keywords:  Abstracting and indexing; Diagnostic accuracy; Reporting guidelines; Research methods; Sensitivity and specificity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111459
  23. Am J Transplant. 2024 Jul;pii: S1600-6135(24)00336-8. [Epub ahead of print]24(7): 1108-1109
    Words matter: An update to the AJT Instructions to Authors with inclusive language guidance.
    Tina Marinelli, Lauren D Nephew, Lisa M McElroy.
      
    Keywords:  health equity; inclusive language
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajt.2024.04.022
  24. Eur J Orthod. 2024 Aug 01. pii: cjae032. [Epub ahead of print]46(4):
    Still to ARRIVE at adequate reporting of orthodontic studies involving animal models.
    Dihya Flitti, Nikolaos Pandis, Jadbinder Seehra.
       BACKGROUND: The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines were introduced to improve the reporting of animal studies. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting adherence of orthodontic speciality animal studies in relation to ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. Associations between the reporting and study characteristics were explored.
    MATERIALS AND METHOD: An electronic database search was undertaken using Medline via PubMed (www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) to identify studies meeting the eligibility criteria published between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023. Data extraction was performed in duplicate and independently. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions for the responses to each checklist item were calculated. Mean values for adequate reporting per ARRIVE item were calculated. A sum score was calculated by adding the responses (0 = not reported, 1 = inadequate reporting, 2 = adequate reporting) per item and sub-questions. On an exploratory basis, univariable linear regression between summary score and study characteristics (year of publication, continent of authorship, type of centre, and number of authors) was performed.
    RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-four studies were analysed. Variability in the adequate reporting of the ARRIVE 2.0 guideline items was evident. In particular, in 32% of studies, there was a lack of reporting of the priori sample size calculation. Overall, the mean reporting score for the sample was 57.9 (SD 6.7 and range 34-74). There were no associations between score and study characteristics except for a weak association for year of publication with a small improvement over time (each additional year).
    CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of animal studies relevant to the speciality of orthodontics is sub-optimal in relation to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. There was a tendency for the non-reporting of items pertaining to study sample size, eligibility, methods to reduce bias and interpretation/scientific implications. Greater awareness and reporting adherence to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines are required to reduce research waste involving animal models.
    Keywords:  ARRIVE guidelines; animal model; orthodontics
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjae032
  25. J Surg Res. 2024 Jul 17. pii: S0022-4804(24)00362-7. [Epub ahead of print]301 352-358
    Reporting Minority Race and Ethnicity in Cardiovascular and Thoracic Journals.
    Shahenda Khedr, Julie Hong, Ninon Forter-Chee-A-Tow, Gala Cygiel, Daithi S Heffernan, Benjamin E Lee, Steven Y Chao.
       INTRODUCTION: Currently, there is no mandatory standard for reporting race and ethnicity in medical journals, presenting significant barriers to studying disparities in medical outcomes. We seek to investigate whether greater recent awareness of diversity and inclusion reflects in reporting of race and ethnicity by peer-reviewed cardiothoracic articles.
    METHODS: Pubmed was queried for clinical outcomes articles published from January 2017 to June 2023 in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, and CHEST Journal. Basic science, translational studies, and international studies were excluded. SAS Studio was used for statistical analysis.
    RESULTS: 817 papers were reviewed, 378 reported race/ethnicity with 354 (93%) reporting White, 267 (71%) reporting Black, 128 (34%) reporting Hispanic, and 119 (31%) reporting Asian. Over 8-y, there were no statistically significant changes in percent of articles that included White (odds ratio 0.808 95% confidence interval [0.624-1.047], P = 0.1068), Black (1.125 [0.984-1.288], P = 0.0857), or Asian (1.096 [0.960-1.250], P = 0.1751) groups. Hispanics were more likely to be reported in recent years (1.147 [1.006-1.307], P = 0.0397). Subset analysis was performed on cardiac (n = 157) and thoracic articles (n = 157) with no significant trends for race reporting in these subsets.
    CONCLUSIONS: Minorities remain underrepresented in reported patient populations in peer-reviewed cardiothoracic journals. Future efforts should prioritize accurately representing these populations in the literature. Inaccurate data and exclusion of minority populations can contribute to disparities observed in overall outcomes.
    Keywords:  Cardiology; Cardiothoracic; Healthcare disparities; Healthcare equity; Racial disparities
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2024.06.027
  26. Eur J Philos Sci. 2024 ;14(3): 32
    Scientific experimental articles are modernist stories.
    Anatolii Kozlov, Michael T Stuart.
      This paper attempts to revive the epistemological discussion of scientific articles. What are their epistemic aims, and how are they achieved? We argue that scientific experimental articles are best understood as a particular kind of narrative: i.e., modernist narratives (think: Woolf, Joyce), at least in the sense that they employ many of the same techniques, including colligation and the juxtaposition of multiple perspectives. We suggest that this way of writing is necessary given the nature of modern science, but it also has specific epistemic benefits: it provides readers with an effective way to grasp the content of scientific articles which increases their understanding. On the other hand, modernist writing is vulnerable to certain kinds of epistemic abuses, which can be found instantiated in modern scientific writing as well.
    Keywords:  Aesthetics in science; Modernism; Scientific articles; Scientific experiments; Scientific imagination; Scientific narratives; Scientific understanding
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-024-00592-7
  27. Korean J Radiol. 2024 Jul 10.
    Reporting Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence Studies in Healthcare (for Both Conventional and Large Language Models): What's New in 2024.
    Seong Ho Park, Chong Hyun Suh.
      
    Keywords:  Artificial intelligence; CLAIM; Chatbot; Deep learning; Healthcare; Large language model; Large multimodal model; Medicine; Radiology; Reporting guideline; TRIPOD+AI
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2024.0598
  28. Int Dent J. 2024 Jul 18. pii: S0020-6539(24)00170-9. [Epub ahead of print]
    Open Access Databases of Craniofacial Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans are Vital for Advancements in Artificial Intelligence.
    Sabarinath Prasad, Jahanzeb Chaudhry, Jagan Kumar Baskardoss, Tanmoy Bhattacharjee, Mariam Baghdady.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.06.017
  29. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2024 Jul 02. pii: S2405-4577(24)00202-X. [Epub ahead of print]63 457-461
    Presentation and publication skills: How to prepare a scientific poster.
    Nathan A Davies, Nicolaas E Deutz, Nathalie Delzenne, Dileep N Lobo.
      A good scientific poster should capture the interest and imagination of the viewer and the overall aim should be to make the target audience want to know more about the topic. A well prepared poster will speak for itself and significantly aid the presenter in sharing the findings of their work. It can often lead to new and exciting collaborative opportunities. Although a well presented poster cannot make up for poor data, a poorly presented poster can lessen the impact of the work and cause it to be overlooked. This article emphasises some of the considerations that need to be borne in mind to make a poster scientifically valid, have visual impact and be attractive to the viewer. The key points are brevity, clarity, neatness and readability.
    Keywords:  ESPEN LLL; Publication skills; Scientific poster
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.06.056
  30. ArXiv. 2024 Jul 01. pii: arXiv:2407.00976v1. [Epub ahead of print]
    ODIN: Open Data In Neurophysiology: Advancements, Solutions & Challenges.
    Colleen J Gillon, Cody Baker, Ryan Ly, Edoardo Balzani, Bingni W Brunton, Manuel Schottdorf, Satrajit Ghosh, Nima Dehghani.
      Across the life sciences, an ongoing effort over the last 50 years has made data and methods more reproducible and transparent. This openness has led to transformative insights and vastly accelerated scientific progress. For example, structural biology and genomics have undertaken systematic collection and publication of protein sequences and structures over the past half-century, and these data have led to scientific breakthroughs that were unthinkable when data collection first began. We believe that neuroscience is poised to follow the same path, and that principles of open data and open science will transform our understanding of the nervous system in ways that are impossible to predict at the moment. To this end, new social structures along with active and open scientific communities are essential to facilitate and expand the still limited adoption of open science practices in our field. Unified by shared values of openness, we set out to organize a symposium for Open Data in Neuroscience (ODIN) to strengthen our community and facilitate transformative neuroscience research at large. In this report, we share what we learned during this first ODIN event. We also lay out plans for how to grow this movement, document emerging conversations, and propose a path toward a better and more transparent science of tomorrow.
  31. Clin Hematol Int. 2024 ;6(3): 1-3
    Scientific writing: how to get published.
    Junia Melo, Mohamad Mohty.
      
    Keywords:  impact factor; publication; scientific writing
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.46989/001c.120878
  32. Neurosurgery. 2024 Aug 01. 95(2): 251-252
    Preprint Servers.
    Douglas Kondziolka.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002974
  33. Open Res Eur. 2023 ;3 182
    Parent attitudes towards data sharing in developmental science.
    Jannath Begum Ali, Rebecca Holman, Amy L Goodwin, Siofra Heraty, Emily J H Jones.
       Background: Data sharing in developmental science is increasingly encouraged, supported by funder and publisher mandates for open data access. Data sharing can accelerate discovery, link researchers with high quality analytic expertise to researchers with large datasets and democratise the research landscape to enable researchers with limited funding to access large sample sizes. However, there are also significant privacy and security concerns, in addition to conceptual and ethical considerations. These are particularly acute for developmental science, where child participants cannot consent themselves. As we move forward into a new era of data openness, it is essential that we adequately represent the views of stakeholder communities in designing data sharing efforts.
    Methods: We conducted a comprehensive survey of the opinions of 195 parents on data sharing in developmental science. Survey themes included how widely parents are willing to share their child's data, which type of organisations they would share the data with and the type of consent they would be comfortable providing.
    Results: Results showed that parents were generally supportive of curated, but not open, data sharing. In addition to individual privacy and security concerns, more altruistic considerations around the purpose of research were important. Parents overwhelmingly supported nuanced consenting models in which preferences for particular types of data sharing could be changed over time. This model is different to that implemented in the vast majority of developmental science research and is contrary to many funder or publisher mandates.
    Conclusions: The field should look to create shared repositories that implement features such as dynamic consent and mechanisms for curated sharing that allow consideration of the scientific questions addressed. Better communication and outreach are required to build trust in data sharing, and advanced analytic methods will be required to understand the impact of selective sharing on reproducibility and representativeness of research datasets.
    Keywords:  Autism spectrum disorder; Open science; consent; data sharing; developmental science; neurodevelopmental conditions; typical development
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.16516.2
  34. Behav Sci Law. 2024 Jul 14.
    Political bias in interpreting social media for forensic purposes: An introductory editorial essay.
    Alan R Felthous, Michael J Vitacco.
      
    Keywords:  bias; forensic mental evaluations; herding; peer review; political bias; social media
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2690
  35. Sci Am. 2023 Oct 01. 329(3): 66
    How AI Generates Images from Text: Algorithms use probability to predict what they should show.
    Sophie Bushwick, Matthew Twombly, Amanda Hobbs.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1023-66
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2024‒11‒22 at 4:28.