DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e182020

Authors: Himel Mondal

Abstract: Delays in editorial decisions are a frequent source of frustration for authors, yet the hidden challenges faced by editors remain largely unrecognized. Reflecting on my experience serving on the editorial boards of two academic journals, I describe the substantial workload, emotional burden, and reviewer scarcity that characterize contemporary editorial practice. Managing approximately 20 manuscripts required sending dozens to over a hundred reviewer invitations per article, often yielding few or no responses and prolonging decision timelines. The relentless, voluntary nature of this work resulted in significant mental fatigue, intrusion into personal life, and eventual burnout, culminating in my resignation from both roles. This reflective account highlights the demanding, often invisible labor of editors and calls for greater empathy and support within the scholarly community.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e173438

Authors: Olivier Pourret

Abstract: As doctoral theses become increasingly accessible through open repositories and similarity-checking software is applied more widely, many early-career researchers encounter the rejection of manuscripts that are legitimately derived from their theses. This viewpoint examines the complexities of text recycling (often inaccurately labelled ‘self-plagiarism’), reviews how publisher policies and editorial practices have evolved in the past decade, and argues for transparent communication among authors, supervisors, and editors. Drawing on the Text Recycling Research Project Best Practices for Researchers and a model policy for publishers, this article proposes measures such as author disclosures, clear repository embargo policies, and submision-system prompts to reconcile the principles of open science with fair publication practices. A more harmonised approach would serve not only authors but also the integrity of the scholarly record.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e165929

Authors: Janaynne Carvalho do Amaral

Abstract: In July 2023, version 3.0 of standard terminology for peer review was published by the National Information Standards Organization. The terminology approaches four aspects of the peer review process: identity transparency, reviewer interacts with, review information published, and post-publication commenting. Using examples of open peer review models with public participation implemented by open access journals covering different subjects, the inclusion of two new categories in the next version of the terminology is proposed herein: manuscript review and pre-publica-tion commenting.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e165365

Authors: Anuradha Baminiwatta, Chathuranga Costa, Dinuka Weerasinghe, S. M. Yasir Arafat, Brady D. Lund

Abstract: Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in academic publishing is expanding rapidly, raising concerns about authorship, transparency, and editorial standards. Although organisations such as Committee on Publication Ethics and International Council of Medical Journal Editors have proposed guidelines on the use of AI, the extent to which they have been adopted by journals in psychiatry and mental health remains unclear.Objectives: To examine the adoption and content of AI policies in psychiatry and mental health journals indexed in SCImago and to determine whether higher-quartile journals are more likely to include policies related to AI.Methods: Policies related to AI in the guidelines for authors and reviewers were examined for two groups of journals, all indexed under Psychiatry and Mental Health in SCImago in November-December 2024. The two groups were (1) a stratified random sample of 200 journals (50 per quartile) chosen from a total of 578 journals and (2) 25 top-ranked journals in psychiatry and mental health.Results: Among the first group, 78 (39%) journals included policies related to AI in their guidelines or instructions for authors and reviewers, the number being greater in top-quartile journals (56% in Q1 versus 20% in Q4; χ² = 14, P = .003). Of the 78 journals, 69 (88.5%) disallowed AI tools as named authors, an equal number mandated disclosure of the use of AI, and 58 (74.4%) emphasised author accountability. Peer review policies mostly prohibited AI use (n = 47); AI-assisted copy editing was permitted in 56 journals; and policies on AI-generated images varied. None reported using AI detection tools. Among the top 25 journals, 16 (64%) included policies related to AI; all prohibited authorship to AI and required disclosure; and one reported using AI detection tools.Conclusion: Despite the rising use of AI in publishing, most psychiatry and mental health journals, especially the lower-quartile journals, lack policies on such use. Wider adoption and standardisation of policies related to AI are crucial to ensure research integrity and credibility.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e151746

Authors: Tom Lang

Abstract: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is literature-based medicine. The essence of EBM is ensuring that research is adequately reported in the literature, not only to help readers determine whether the research is sound but also to ascertain that it can be applied appropriately to specific patients and conditions. This need to document clinical research gave rise to the standards-reporting movement in medicine, the first and best-known standard being the 1996 CONSORT statement for reporting rand-omized controlled trials. Guidelines and checklists are widely used to augment mem-ory, improve quality and consistency, ensure thoroughness and efficiency, structure repetitive tasks, and to reduce errors, omissions, ambiguities, and misunderstandings. These characteristics make them ideal for reporting the designs, activities, and results of medical research. In fact, EBM is built around developing and using guidelines and checklists. As an early participant in the clinical guideline movement, I learned a lot about how and how not to prepare guidelines. I describe my lessons here.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e159921

Authors: Jeremy Y. Ng, Daivat Bhavsar, Neha Dhanvanthry, Lex Bouter, Teresa Chan, Annette Flanagin, Alfonso Iorio, Cynthia Lokker, Hervé Maisonneuve, Ana Marušić, David Moher, Holger Cramer

Abstract: Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots are advanced conversational programmes capable of performing tasks such as identifying methodological flaws, verifying references, and improving language clarity in manuscripts. Their use in peer review has the potential to enhance efficiency, reduce reviewer workload, and address inconsistencies in review quality. However, concerns remain regarding their reliability, ethical implications, and transparency in decision-making, and little is known about how peer reviewers perceive these tools.Objectives: To assess peer reviewers’ attitudes and perceptions towards the use of AI chatbots in the peer review process, including their familiarity with AI, perceived benefits and challenges, ethical considerations, and expectations for future roles.Methods: An international cross-sectional survey will be conducted among academic peer reviewers. The survey will collect data on participants’ prior experience with AI, perceptions of the utility of chatbots in supporting peer review, concerns related to ethics and transparency, and anticipated future applications.Results: This study will report descriptive and comparative analyses of reviewers’ responses, highlighting patterns in attitudes and perceptions by demographic and professional characteristics.Conclusions: The findings may offer evidence to inform the development of future policies and best practices for the ethical and effective integration of AI chatbots in peer review, with the goal of improving review quality while addressing potential risks.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e160424

Authors: Bor Luen Tang

Abstract: A paradox was observed with regard to an increase in gold open access publications despite the increase in financial constraints. While this was viewed positively by some as an indication of strategic adaptation and financial sacrifice to publish in open access journals with an impact factor instead of conference proceedings, there could be alternative explanations for the paradox. I propose views that reflect more negative issues with citations, peer review, and an arguably suboptimal mutually propagating publishing loop for gold open access publications.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e165043

Authors: Reese Richardson, Matt Spick

Abstract: The combination of open-access datasets, machine learning workflows, increased computing capacity, and generative artificial intelligence has effectively removed many of the rate-limiting steps in manuscript production. This has created an industry of click-data science and a flood of low-quality manuscripts based on large health datasets such as the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the UK Biobank, and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. These papers often employ statistically appropriate methods and real data, but introduce misleading results and false discoveries to the literature. Here, we offer suggestions for editors on how to identify such manuscripts and reject them at the point of submission, reducing the burden on the publishing process.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e162102

Authors: Londa Schiebinger, Mathias Wullum Nielsen, Elena Gissi, Shirin Heidari, Richard Horton, Kari C. Nadeau, Dorothy Ngila, Safiya Umoja Noble, Hee Young Paik, Girmaw Abebe Tadesse, Eddy Y. Zeng, James Zou, Joan Marsh

Abstract: Intersectional analysis goes beyond consideration of single variables to examine the compounded impact at the intersections of, for example, gender and race, or geographical location and caste. The Guidelines for Intersectional Analysis in Science and Technology (GIST) help researchers, journal editors, and funding agencies systematically integrate intersectional analysis into relevant domains of science and technology. These guidelines serve as a roadmap for quantitative intersectional analysis throughout the research process—from setting strategic research priorities and shaping research questions to data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Here we provide a checklist to facilitate author and journal editor compliance with the guidelines. We recommend that the GIST checklist be added to journals’ “Information for Authors”. The goal is to reset the research default to include intersectional analysis, where appropriate. Intersectional analysis leads to better science: precision in research best guides effective social and environmental policies that, in turn, enhance global equity and sustainability.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e156907

Authors: Gina Joubert

Abstract: Background: As the number of journals and manuscripts continues to increase, so do the calls on researchers to review. To ensure that researchers accept or decline review invitations quickly and appropriately, review invitations should be informative.Objectives: Review invitations received by one health sciences researcher are sum-marized and invitations from journals listed in Web of Science, Scopus, or Directory of Open Access Journals are compared with invitations from journals listed in none of these three databases.Methods: This quantitative cross-sectional study included review invitations that the author received from journals between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2024. For the analysis, only the most recent review invitation from each journal was included so that the results were not skewed towards journals that requested reviews more fre-quently. Requests for reviews of revised manuscripts were excluded.Results: Review invitations were received from 52 journals, 10 (19%) of which were not listed in any of the three databases. Emails from the 42 listed journals generally provided more, and more appropriate, information such as the manuscript abstract (98% of listed journals vs. 60% of unlisted journals) and addressing the email recipient correctly (62% of listed journals vs. 30% of unlisted journals). For 45% of listed journals and 50% of unlisted journals, the time to review was not stated in the email itself and 74% of listed journals and 80% of unlisted journals made no statement regarding the anonymity (or not) of reviewing.Conclusion: Minimum requirements for review invitations are recommended, as well as areas for further research.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e165571

Authors: European Science Editing

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e164741

Authors: Michal Ordak

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e153973

Authors: Alex Glynn

Abstract: The tendency of generative artificial intelligence (AI) to ‘hallucinate’ false information is well known; AI-generated citations to non-existent sources have penetrated the bibliographies of peer-reviewed publications. Drawing from the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines, American judicial contention with generative AI, and the submission of prior art to the US Patent and Trademark Office, the author proposes that journals require authors to submit the full text of each cited source along with their manuscripts, thereby preventing authors from citing material whose full text they cannot produce. This solution requires limited additional work by authors or editors while effectively immunizing journals against hallucinated references.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e150991

Authors: Gheorghe Cuciureanu

Abstract: Background: Predatory conferences vary greatly in their format, scale, and organization and adversely affect researchers from less developed countries the most. Although ways to identify such conferences continue to be refined, their organizers are often a step ahead and strive to be increasingly sophisticated. One effective way of detecting whether a given conference is predatory is to submit a nonsensical manuscript and monitor its fate.Objective: To examine the extent to which scientific conferences organized by institutions in Moldova match the established markers of predatory conferences.Methods: A manuscript authored by a fictitious individual was submitted to 16 scientific conferences. The manuscript included passages copied verbatim from other sources and introduced a fabricated and absurd indicator for evaluating science, namely the Timmy Index (named after the author’s dog). The conferences were subsequently matched against established markers for predatory conferences.Results: Of the 16 conferences, 14 accepted the manuscript; 9 issued a certificate of attendance; and 12 published the article in their proceedings, although none of the 16 charged any participation or publication fees.Conclusions: Pseudoscientific conferences are deeply embedded in the academic community of Moldova. The operational model employed by these conferences fosters a publication culture among local researchers that makes it acceptable to submit manuscripts to predatory journals and conferences, prioritizing rapid publishing for a fee and without proper peer review or an actual presentation at a conference.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e145158

Authors: Lea Škorić, Miroslav Rajter, Bojan Macan, Jelka Petrak

Abstract: Background: Researchers’ attitudes to, and use of, open access publishing are shaped by many factors, including the characteristics of scientific disciplines – whether STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine) or SSH (Social Sciences and Humanities) – and various micro-characteristics of the environment in which the researchers operate.Objectives: To analyse the attitudes of Croatian authors to open access (OA) publishing and to explore disciplinary differences between researchers in STEM and those in SSH.Methods: Croatian researchers from both groups – STEM and SSH – were surveyed at the beginning of 2023. The online survey comprised 18 questions covering general attitudes towards OA, OA publishing models, the pay-to-publish option, and the criteria for choosing publication outlets.Results: Out of 1042 researchers who responded to the survey, the analysis focused on the 763 (a response rate of about 5%) who fully completed the questionnaire. The majority of respondents expressed support for OA publishing and believed that it was beneficial to research and education. However, their attitudes towards specific benefits and shortcomings of OA publishing showed significant disciplinary differences: researchers in SSH were more convinced that OA enables timely distribution of new knowledge and makes it more visible, whereas researchers in STEM were more concerned about the impact of OA on the further commercialization of scientific publishing and about questionable peer review standards often associated with OA. In selecting a journal for publication, the respondents were motivated primarily by the journal’s reputation. However, researchers in STEM tended to prioritize the journal’s quantitative metrics, whereas researchers in SSH considered such practical aspects as the time taken by a journal to publish and its acceptance rate to be more important. Differences between the two categories of researchers in their attitudes towards publishing in exclusively pay-to-publish journals were statistically significant: researchers in STEM were more receptive to that model whereas those in SSH were opposed to publication fees or article processing charges, even if they were paid not by authors themselves but by their employers, funders, or other entities.Conclusion: Researchers in STEM and those in SSH did not differ significantly in their general attitude towards OA publishing. The differences, when present, stemmed partly from the characteristics of scientific disciplines and partly from differences in the criteria for promotions. Researchers in STEM published significantly more often in international pay-to-publish OA journals, whereas researchers in SSH published significantly more often in national diamond OA journals. Continued state financial support to national diamond OA journals, together with making available more funds to publish in international OA journals, will be crucial to maintaining the current level of OA publishing in Croatia.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e120210

Authors: Hristina Prodanova, Stelian Dimitrov

Abstract: Background: The requirement of publishing high-quality papers in established peer-reviewed journals is still in the early days of implementation among academic geographers in Bulgaria, which limits the visibility and impact of Bulgarian research and delays the possibilities of academic recognition and international collaboration.Objectives: To examine the current visibility and impact of Bulgarian geographers using quantitative analysis of publicly available data derived from eight scientometric databases and social media platforms.Methods: Relevant data were collected for 116 researchers affiliated with five institutions from the following sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Publons, ORCID, Google Scholar, Research Gate, LinkedIn, and X (Twitter). Using Microsoft Excel, the performance of each of the researchers and each of the institutions was quantified in terms of (1) the number of publications, (2) the number of citations, (3) H-index, (4) i10-index, and (5) Research Interest Score. The scores were also plotted using RAWGraphs and Microsoft PowerPoint.Results: Only half of the researchers had published in internationally indexed journals. The institutions and departments in the capital city, Sofia, enjoyed significantly and disproportionately higher visibility than those from smaller towns. Geographers from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (Sofia) and one department from Sofia University showed the highest visibility on Scopus (100%), whereas two rural universities – the University of Veliko Tarnovo and Shumen University – were visible mostly on ResearchGate and Google Scholar. Overall visibility of each institution on social media was very low (8%–16%).Conclusions: The analysis led to several recommendations on increasing the visibility and impact of Bulgarian research in geography. These recommendations will be valuable in research management, public relations, especially in improving communications and devising development strategies.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e142485

Authors: Shelly Melissa Pranić, Ana Heredia, Charikleia Tzanakou, Pavel Ovseiko, Kate Wilson, Diana Samuel, Christina Kassiteridi

Abstract: Background: Scholarly settings lack racial, ethnic, sex, gender, geographic, and linguistic diversity. Despite initiatives to promote more inclusive scholarly communities, the extent of implementation of policies related to equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) remains low.Objectives: The objective is to survey the perceptions and opinions of journal editors and other stakeholders with reference to policies related to EDI and relevant practices in their journals and organizations.Methods: We sent out, through email, a link to a survey with 16 Likert-scale items and 8 open-ended questions in English to assess the perceptions of EDI. Questions were generated based on discussions at meetings of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) EDI Committee in November and December 2023. The survey was available from 8 to 30 January 2024. Snowball sampling was used among members of EASE and those of related professional organizations recruited through social networks.Results: Of the total of 232 participants, 129/232 (56%) responded on behalf of journals and 103/232 (44%) on behalf of organizations. Most (72%) considered EDI to be important or very important for their journal or organization, and even more (76%) wanted examples of existing policies and guidelines for implementing EDI. Exactly 50% (27/54) reported that their organizations have no published EDI policies, and 59% (54/91) reported the absence of an EDI statement.Conclusion: Although the survey showed wide support for EDI within journals and organizations, efforts to develop EDI policies and statements have been limited, as reflected in the responses that welcomed guidance on EDI. This suggests a need for increased awareness and knowledge-sharing about EDI policies and practices, as well as concrete actions to create a more diverse scholarly community.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e156214

Authors: Agnieszka Freda, Ana Heredia, Charoula Tzanakou, Joan Marsh

Abstract: -

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e151110

Authors: Bor Luen Tang

Abstract: The US Office of Research Integrity (ORI)’s revised policy, which excludes authorship credit disputes from plagiarism, is potentially problematic because acts of intellectual property (IP) misappropriation, intended or otherwise, might potentially be exonerated from plagiarism or not adequately adjudicated as such. I argue that all authorship credit disputes should be considered as involving plagiarism unless it is clearly proven that there is no misappropriation of IP on the part of the alleged/respondent. This notion is important to prevent the prevalence of injustice due to power imbalances between senior and junior as well as between residential and tem-porary/departed researchers.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e136050

Authors: Petar Milovanovic, Ranka Stankovic, Vukan Ivanovic, Ana Petrovic, Vladimir Nikolic, Katarina Milutinovic, Marija Jeremic, Lazar Davidovic, Nebojsa Lalic, Tatjana Pekmezovic

Abstract: Background: Doctoral programmes are an important pillar of medical education, and although many universities award the best theses, the criteria for selection of awardees and the topics of their doctoral theses are seldom analysed.Objectives: To analyse the landscape of doctoral research through assessing the temporal trends in the criteria related to recognising the best theses.Methods: A total of 55 award-winning doctoral theses, from those submitted to the Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, over 7 years (2016–2022), were examined, focusing on the number of awardees, publications based on the theses, research subfields, and keywords.Results: The awardees comprised 36 women (65%) and 19 men (35%). The number of award-winning theses per year in clinical medicine and public health increased over the years (P < .05 for both the fields). The awardees had published a total of 134 articles based on their theses before the thesis defence, and half of these were published in open-access journals. The journals that each published at least 4 of these articles were PLOS One, Experimental and Molecular Pathology, and Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity. The cumulative impact factor of these publications showed no significant increase (P > .05). The subfields that accounted for at least 5 of the publi-cations were molecular medicine (13 publications) among the basic or translational fields, cardiology (5) among clinical medicine, and epidemiology (7) among public health. Mapping the co-occurrence of keywords from all the dissertations identified some research hotspots, which included cancer, oxidative stress, Parkinsonism, risk factors, genetic polymorphisms, and biomarkers.Conclusion: The increasing number of award-winning theses reflects the rising quality of doctoral research and the growing motivation of candidates to choose indexed journals as outlets for papers based on the theses. This approach can serve as a basis for strategic evaluation of the practices for evaluating PhD theses and for identifying strong and weak spots in the research landscape of medical schools to guide future doctoral research and the competitiveness of doctoral programmes.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e143790

Authors: Tom Lang

Abstract: Inclusive language is ‘language free of stereotypes, implicit bias, and negative messages’. The inclusive language movement intends to ‘acknowledge diversity, convey respect to all people, be sensitive to differences, and promote equal opportunities’. However, inclusive language is an idea or a value, not a widespread, organised effort to establish a definitive set of terms. Who decides what terms to use? What are the costs and consequences of establishing these terms? To better understand the movement, I looked at it from the perspective of diffusion theory, which seeks to explain how new products, services, and ideas are adopted (diffused) in a social system over time. The theory has identified five characteristics of successful innovations: 1) high relative advantage over alternatives, 2) high compatibility with personal and social norms, 3) low complexity in adoption and use, 4) high ‘triability’ or the chance to use the innovation before adoption, and 5) high visibility that confirms the choice of adoption. By these characteristics, many inclusive language terms face substantial barriers to widespread voluntary acceptance. These same five characteristics, however, can help inform the movement by identifying which terms are more likely to be accepted. Here, I identify where non-inclusive terms appear in the language and suggest how diffusion theory can be used to assess the likelihood of their adoption.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e148131

Authors: Diana Samuel, Mabel Chew

Abstract: N/A

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e148267

Authors: Swarna Buddha Nayok, Harsh Pathak

Abstract: N/A

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e139166

Authors: Anda-Cosmina Hângan, Andrei Ognean, Michal Orlický, Karlo Prižmić, Dorian Karuc, Hrvoje Baric

Abstract: Background: In 2016, the SAGER (sex and gender equity in research) guidelines were developed to standardize research reporting and to facilitate the generalizability of research findings for women and men, thereby impacting clinical practice.Objectives: To assess the extent to which the SAGER guidelines have been implemented in neurosurgical publications.Methods: Original research articles from leading neurosurgical journals indexed in Google Scholar under the category ‘Neurosurgery’ were examined and assessed for the extent to which the articles conformed to the SAGER guidelines. Data were extracted on subjects (sample size and relative proportions of sex or gender) and on adherence to the SAGER guidelines (one item for general principles and five items from recommendations for each section of the article) and summarized.Results: We included 98 articles from 10 leading neurosurgical journals. The average number of subjects for a journal was 4728, of which 2056 (43.5%) were women. Only nine (9.2%) of the 98 articles used the terms ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ appropriately. The outcomes were disaggregated by sex in 16 (16.3%) articles; sex differences were acknowledged in the introduction in six (6.1%) articles; considered in the ‘Methods’ section in five (5.1%) articles; the differing numbers of women and men were justified in the methods in two (2%) articles; and the generalizability of the results to women or men was discussed in five (5.1%) articles. The journals showed no differences in the extent to which they adhered to the guidelines.Conclusions: Reporting sex and gender equity in neurosurgical journals is negligible for the most screened SAGER items as is the endorsement of the guidelines. The results likely reflect the lack of awareness of both the importance of disaggregating data by sex or gender and the existence of pertinent guidelines.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e142904

Authors: Chris Zielinski

Abstract: Generative AI/chatbots provide a valuable new writing tool, but they are just software products, and software does not have a legal persona. You cannot sue, arraign, fine, imprison or otherwise punish a chatbot. This is one reason why many journals, as well as COPE, ICMJE and WAME, among other practitioners’ organisations, advise against identifying AI as an author. Furthermore, chatbots produce a statistically generated language, or botfo, by applying probability to the materials they have scanned. It is a strangely dehumanised language, lacking intentionality and containing conscious and unconscious bias. Ultimately, this paper argues that we should not call chatbots authors since they are unaccountable, and can’t think, judge or be jailed.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e137960

Authors: Adam Larson, Matan Shelomi

Abstract: Predatory journals exploit the open access model for profit, often publishing papers with minimal or nonexistent peer review. Predatory publishing stings can identify predatory publishers and increase awareness of the problem, but there are no guidelines for effective stings. We propose that stings should include peer review red flags that would stop the sting from being accepted by reputable journals, be followed by a public sting statement to alert others to the predatory journal identified and predatory publishing in general, and avoid both payment to predatory publishers and risk to the stinger.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e132218

Authors: Prakoso Bhairawa Putera, Amelya Gustina, Reny Nirmala, Azhar Azhar, Nengyanti Nengyanti

Abstract: Background: The progress of social sciences in Indonesia is evident through the surge in research activities, as showcased by publications in globally respected journals. A study by Putera et al. points out that, for the first time between 2002 and 2004, Indonesian authors ranked social sciences among the top five fields with international publications. Since the 1998 reform era, the social sciences have encountered exciting opportunities and significant challenges. These challenges underscore the urgent need for further development. Significant efforts are needed to enhance the presence and impact of Indonesian social science thought globally.Objectives: To identify hotspots and trends in research from Indonesia in social sciences from 1999 to 2023 and also to identify dominant research clusters, their alignment with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and prevalent methodologies to serve as a guide to future research and policymaking.Methods: We employed bibliometric analysis and VOSviewer visualization to examine articles by Indonesian authors in the Scopus database, to group the articles into clusters based on their research focus, and to examine their alignment with various SDGs.Results: We identified five dominant research clusters: (1) climate change and environmental governance, (2) Sunda Isles and archaeological evidence, (3) urban development, (4) rural development and economic impact, and (5) empowerment and food security. Each cluster had a specific focus and relevance to different SDGs. The most cited articles predominantly used qualitative methods – particularly narrative research – whereas methods such as action research, ethnography, grounded theory, and phenomenology were underrepresented.Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the need for continued support and diversification of research methodologies to enhance the impact of social science research in Indonesia. Future research could explore underrepresented methodologies to provide a more holistic understanding of social phenomena.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e137675

Authors: Bahar Mehmani, Mario Malički

Abstract: To address the low overlap between reviewer comments and the publication recommendations they make, as well as to suggest guidance on what kind of peer review report would benefit journals and editors the most, we introduced structured peer review to Elsevier journals and analyzed its effect in our June 2024 paper: peerj.com/articles/17514/ . To further promote the implementation of the structured peer review process and help reviewers prepare thorough review reports, in this paper, we present our set of structured peer review questions in a checklist format.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e139657

Authors: Philippe C. Baveye

Abstract: n/a

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e140235

Authors: Joshua Wang

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e132317

Authors: Christopher H. Wortley

Abstract: Today, 98% of peer-reviewed scientific publishing is in English, which is also the official language of most scientific events and international academic journals. UNESCO, through its Recommendation on Open Science, has called on scientific institutions to foster multilingualism in the practice of science, in scientific publications, and in academic communications. At The Lancet, we recognize the need to provide more equitable and inclusive access to scientific knowledge by providing abstracts translated into relevant languages. Following a pilot, a workflow for abstract translation was devised. I present here details of our abstract translation procedure and rollout.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e136216

Authors: Bor Luen Tang

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e124807

Authors: Silvije Šegulja, Gordana Starčević Klasan, Anja Šegulja Perić, Mirela Vučković, Iva Sorta-Bilajac Turina

Abstract: Background: Case reports are especially important in paediatrics, and CARE (CAse REport) guidelines help in standardizing the reporting in case reports.Objectives: To examine the actual use of CARE guidelines in journals in the field of paediatrics.Methods: Journals that publish case reports were selected from the databases of the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC; Science Citation Index Expanded, or SCIE; and Emerging Sources Citation Index, or ESCI). All journals that publish case reports and mention CARE guidelines were included, and the ranking (quartiles) of those journals was also recorded. From all the journals in paediatrics that mention CARE in their instructions for authors, 5% of all the open-access case reports were selected (limited to 10 reports from any one journal), and every 10th case report was included in the analysis. The reports published between 2013 and 2023 were further analysed for their compliance with the 13-item CARE checklist.Results: Of 184 journals in the field of paediatrics category included in the WoSCC, 130 (71%) were indexed in the SCIE and 54 (29%) in the ESCI; 161 (87%) publish case reports; and 121 (65%) mention CARE guidelines in their instructions for authors. However, they differ in applying CARE guidelines (P = .001), and more journals included in the ESCI mention CARE guidelines than do those included in the SCIE. During 2013–2023, a total of 22,989 case reports were published in the 121 journals that mention CARE guidelines. Of the total, 6733 (29%) were open access. Our final sample comprised 326 (5%) open access case reports that were open access, of which 240 (74%) were in the journals included in the SCIE and 86 (26%) in the ESCI. On aver-age, these reports were given a score of 8.5 (SD 1.97; range, 2–13) out of the maximum possible score of 13. The highest compliance was observed for the informed consent item (99%), while the lowest compliance was found for the keywords item (22%).Conclusion: It is important for journals to ensure that during writing and editing, the case reports they publish adhere to CARE guidelines so as to eliminate biased reporting and improve their quality.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e123288

Authors: Esteban Giraldo-González, Edgar García-Valencia, Juan Felipe Córdoba-Restrepo, Elea Giménez-Toledo

Abstract: Background: The project Cartografía de la Edición Académica Iberoamericana aims to analyze the production of academic books in Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries in the Americas. Following the path opened by similar studies in Colombia and Brazil, we present the results for Mexico.Objectives: To analyze academic books published in Mexico between 2013 and 2019 to examine the entities that published the books and their respective shares in the total output.Methods: A mix of quantitative and qualitative approaches was used to characterize the Mexican publishers of academic books based on data on ISBNs, the International Standard Book Numbers. The data comprised the information provided to the agency that assigns a unique ISBN to each book. We also used the Delphi method and formed discussion groups of experts. The groups were set up on the basis of responses to semi-structured questionnaires that sought to determine the criteria an entity must satisfy to be considered an academic publisher.Conclusions: Of the 196 533 ISBNs issued in Mexico between 2013 and 2019, 117 929 (60%) were issued for books dealing with academic subjects. Commercial publishers accounted for the largest share of those books (63 044 ISBNs, or 53.4% of all the academic books), followed by university presses (29 628 ISBNs, or 25.1%). The group of experts suggested that among the 1289 publishers that requested ISBNs for academic books, only 151 (11.7%) can be considered truly academic publishers; 678 (52.6%) cannot; and 460 (35.7%) were borderline cases, as they meet some but not all the criteria for them to be considered truly academic.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e131528

Authors: Philippe C. Baveye

Abstract: Journal and book editors in most disciplines are faced with a flood of meta-analyses, which critical reviews have shown are not always of sufficient quality. In the short run, editors could give targeted instructions to authors and make specific recommendations to reviewers to ensure that not only meta-analyses but also research syntheses more broadly, published under their watch, meet acceptable publication standards. In order to achieve satisfactory improvements in the long run, editors should foster fundamental changes in the way the publication of negative and non-significant results is handled.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e122090

Authors: Nikita Lad, Iva Grabarić Andonovski, Dana Compton, Jo Wixon, Mary Hodgson

Abstract: Background: To enlist publishers and journals in promoting the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the United Nations and the International Publishers Association (IPA) launched the SDG Publishers Compact in 2020, and the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) published its Environmental Manifesto, a set of recommendations for journal editors on how to contribute to reducing a journal’s carbon footprint. It is important to monitor the impact of these initiatives on journal policies for developing future recommendations.Objectives: The EASE and the Higher Education Sustainability Initiative (HESI) SDG Publishers Compact Fellows developed a survey to assess the progress made by signatories to the SDG Publishers Compact, detect obstacles that prevent other publishers or journals from signing the compact, assess awareness and implementation of the EASE Environmental Manifesto, and identify other initiatives that promote SDGs.Methods: A multi-stakeholder group was formed, which included editors and both commercial and non-profit publishers, to design questions suited to journals and organizations at different stages of sustainability action. The survey was designed using SurveyMonkey, introduced in an online workshop, distributed through mail-ing lists to more than 2000 addresses, and promoted on social networks, and a total of 79 responses were collected and discussed.Results: Most respondents were representatives of smaller journals based in Europe. The majority were aware of the SDGs, but only half were aware of the SDG Publishers Compact, and only 17 (22%) were signatories to the Compact. Lack of awareness was the major reason for not joining the initiative, followed by lack of time or resources. Respondents focused mostly on quality education, and the majority were acting to achieve at least one SDG. Signatories to the compact mostly have a written environmental policy, have appointed an environmental officer, and are acquiring content related to the SDGs and promoting related activities. Non-signatories are also acting to minimize their environmental impact but have not considered the SDGs in their workflows. Both groups mainly do not have a dedicated budget to achieve the SDGs and have not completed a baseline of their activities. Activities undertaken to reach the SDGs had the most effect on community awareness. Half the respondents were members of EASE and were taking actions aligned with the Environmental Manifesto, mostly towards reducing their journal’s carbon footprint, and 25% are fol-lowing other initiatives aimed at achieving the SDGs as well.Conclusions: The survey showed that editors of small academic journals were not aware of the SDG Publishers Compact, although most of them are acting to achieve at least one SDG. Signatories to the Compact are implementing SDGs into their work-flows and practices, which shows the importance of the initiative. Greater efforts should be undertaken to make the editors of smaller journals aware of the Compact, encourage them to become its signatories, and provide them with more resources and metrics for monitoring their activities.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e135388

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract: In his recent correspondence, Olivier Pourret points out the occurrence of “tortured phrases” due to the application of paraphrasing software.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e132192

Authors: Bor Luen Tang

Abstract: An exercise in AI driven publishing

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e123908

Authors: Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: The current and predominant school of thought in academic publishing, with a correspondingly rigorously implemented set of ethical policies, notes that classic authorship is a purely human endeavor. However, such rigid conceptual restrictions on authorship for artificial intelligence (AI), like large language models (LLMs), may be borne from fear, emerging perhaps from being intellectually threatened by AI/LLMs that might outperform humans. In this paper, considering several caveats, a world of academic publishing in which AI/LLMs are offered a fair opportunity of authorship, coined AI-authorship, is envisioned.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e131771

Authors: Olivier Pourret

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e129735

Authors: Ksenija Baždarić, Joan Marsh, Duncan Nicholas

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e120611

Authors: Bor Luen Tang

Abstract: Inaccuracies, false information, and fraudulent work in scientific publications could cause indirect harm, lead to significant negative socioeconomic impacts, and erode public trust in science. Journals – and publishers – play an essential role as gate-keepers in ensuring the veracity of published scientific literature. However, beyond corporate pride and integrity, there is usually no legal obligation or formal regulatory requirement for journals to ensure the veracity of the work they publish or be efficient and transparent in any investigative proceedings. Here, I propose a numerical indicator of the performance of a journal in terms of its efforts at establishing the veracity of the work it publishes and due diligence, an index computed from the following values: a) frequency of alleged irregularities or misconduct, b) frequency of retractions, c) efficiency of the journal’s response to concerns or allegations, and d) transparency and thoroughness with which the journal investigates those concerns and announces its findings and actions.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e118119

Authors: Fahmi H. Kakamad, Berun A. Abdalla, Hiwa O. Abdullah, Sami S. Omar, Shvan H. Mohammed, Sasan M. Ahmed, Karukh K. Mohammed, Hemn A. Hassan, Hiwa O. Baba, Jaafar O. Ahmed, Mohammed Q. Mustafa, Diyar A. Omar, Rawezh Q. Salih, Hawbash M. Rahim, Dahat A. Hussein, Marwan N. Hassan, Tomas M. Mikael, Hunar A. Hassan, Kayhan A. Najar

Abstract: Although predatory publishers are increasingly recognized, universally accepted criteria for defining predatory journals are lacking. These journals challenge the scholarly community by blurring the line between legitimate and questionable publishing practices. Several lists and reports of predatory journals have been published, which offer valuable insights; however, they are not devoid of criticism. Beall’s list, although criticized for its inclusion criteria, is currently managed anonymously and updated infrequently. Cabells’ list uses an extensive array of inclusion criteria, some of which are similar to those used in Beall’s list. Several of these criteria are redundant and fail to detect predatory practices, and using all of them in evaluating a journal is seldom practicable. Kscien’s list has emerged as a promising alternative for identifying predatory publishers or journals. However, it requires refinement, potentially through creating a distinct list supported by unequivocal evidence, such as accepting a fake manuscript (ascertained through a sting operation). The present review seeks to catalyze research on identifying predatory journals and publishers by comparing existing lists and suggesting new techniques for detecting predatory practices.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e124173

Authors: Joshua Wang

Abstract: The open access movement has drastically reconfigured the financial burdens of scholarly publishing. Yet, the influence of a marketized scholarly publishing system on doctoral education remains unexplored. I reflect on my own PhD candidature to illustrate how article processing charges disempower doctoral candidates. I argue that the current open access publishing model unfairly advantages candidates with personal, familial and/or institutional wealth. The inequalities imposed on doctoral students by our sectors’ current publishing habits ultimately bias who will be paid to produce and safeguard knowledge in the future. Doctoral students can no longer be ignored in debates over open access publishing.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e123965

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract:

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e114702

Authors: Patrizia Pezzoli, Weili Zhai, Joan Marsh, Essi Viding

Abstract: Background: Improving inclusiveness in mental health research merits attention as we seek to reduce inequalities in mental health. Academic journals can promote inclusiveness through editorial practices related to the selection of content and the composition of journal editorial boards. Objectives: To investigate the attitudes, awareness, and actions of journal editors concerning inclusiveness in mental health research and editorial practices. Methods: We surveyed 74 chief and senior editors, representing 55 prominent journals in neuroscience, psychiatry, and psychology (2021 impact factor M = 8.04, SD = 10.76). Results: Most respondents (74–99%) acknowledged the importance of inclusiveness in mental health research, and a majority (62–78%) were familiar with existing guidelines. Half or fewer of the journals (49–50%) had policies for selecting content that is diverse, and 20% had policies regarding inclusion of individuals with lived experience of mental health challenges. Well over half the journals (57–72%) had policies to widen diversity among their editorial boards and roughly half (43–53%) among peer reviewers, although only a few (18–23%) included among their editors or peer reviewers individuals with lived experience of dealing with mental health challenges. Conclusions: This study highlighted an intention-action gap, with positive attitudes and awareness but limited editorial practices promoting inclusiveness in mental health research. Inclusion of individuals with lived experience emerged as an area in particular need of improvement. We discuss potential strategies that journals might consider to foster inclusiveness, such as diversity training, publication checklists, and infrastructure that supports participatory approaches.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e118015

Authors: Setiowiji Handoyo, Poppy Indah Dwi Prastiti, Iwan Ridwan Stiaji

Abstract: Background: Institutional transformation – integrating many disparate research institutes into the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN, for Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional) – was the most significant reform in the history of institutional governance in Indonesia. This integration policy aims to enable the state to strengthen the national research and innovation ecosystem and improve the performance of research institutions, one indicator of which is their output of publications reporting the results of research. Objectives: To compare the published output of research institutes before and after the integration of research institutions into BRIN. Methods: Relevant data retrieved through Scopus on 24 December 2023 and spanning the period between 2015 and 2023 were analysed using Microsoft Excel, and collaboration networks of authors and of countries were constructed using VOSviewer and examined for co-authors in different countries collaborating with first authors in Indonesia. Results: The number of publications increased annually over the period 2015–2023. However, the annual rate of growth after (2021–2023) the integration of research institutions was higher (36%) than that before (2015–2021) the integration (30%). Conference papers (51%) dominated the pre-integration era, whereas articles (57%) dominated the post-integration era, and the number of reputable journals in which the research was published was greater after the integration. Conclusions: The period after the integration of research institutions saw enhanced research output in terms of the number of research publications, annual rate of growth in that number, and the number of reputable journals in which the publications appeared.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e119537

Authors: Gina Joubert

Abstract: Not applicable.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e114734

Authors: Gina Joubert

Abstract: Background: Statistical analyses are a key component of quantitative research in health sciences. Objectives: To review the instructions for authors on reporting and presentation of statistical methods by all health sciences journals based in South Africa. Methods: Health sciences journals based in South Africa that publish original quantitative research articles were identified using three sources, namely the list of accredited South African journals compiled by the South African Department of Higher Education and Training in 2022, relevant journals covered in Scopus, and web pages of major health sciences publishers in South Africa. The list was cross-checked against the listing of journals in Sabinet, an online database covering South Africa, under the category ‘Collection: Medicine and Health’. The instructions for authors given by the journals were accessed through their websites. The form for recording data was based on items listed in the ‘Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature’ (SAMPL) guidelines. Results: All except one of the 52 journals could be located online. Of the 51, 13 (25%) made no mention of statistics in their instructions, and 11 (22%) made only a general statement regarding statistical content with no further guidance. The statistical item most frequently mentioned was the P value (45% of journals), whereas the rest of the items appeared in the instructions of 20% or fewer journals. Nine journals (18%) referred to the EQUATOR guidelines, mainly CONSORT (10%). Conclusion: Nearly half of the health sciences journals based in South Africa either did not mention statistics at all in their instructions for authors or made only a cursory reference to statistics. The study thus emphasizes that these journals, in their instructions for authors, need to cover in greater detail the reporting and presentation of statistical methods in articles reporting quantitative research.

HTML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e116106

Authors: Dikran Toroser, Muhammad Sarwar, Lisa DeTora, Laura Dormer, Maryam Sayab

Abstract: Peer review is a crucial component of the scientific publication process, enabling validation of research, identification of errors, and removal of potential bias. However, there are some well-known limitations, including slow publication cycles and overstringent gatekeeping. Artificial intelligence and digital technology are revolutionizing peer review and publishing by addressing some of the limitations, and fostering closer collaboration among scholars worldwide.1-3 This paradigm shift aligns with the principles of open science, enhancing the reach and impact of scholarly work. Digital tools for peer review are already transforming many aspects of this process, by enhancing quality control, automation of routine tasks, and expediting laborious aspects of the peer review process, thereby enhancing speed and efficiency. Digital platforms are reducing publication times and potentially allowing for the promotion of diversity and inclusivity of the peer reviewer pool by vastly enhancing global connectivity. Selecting qualified and impartial global reviewers in the digital context is vital for the future of our rapidly evolving and increasingly diverse publication landscape. Editors play a key role in oversight while providing reviewers with clear guidelines and training. In conclusion, digital tools assisting peer review will inevitably play an increasingly useful role in enhancing the efficiency, and potentially the inclusivity and objectivity of the process.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e113535

Authors: A.J. (Tom) van Loon

Abstract: Background: Scientists are confronted nowadays with a tsunami of requests by preda-tory journals to contribute.Objectives: To inform potential authors, readers, reviewers, and editors of scien-tific articles about the ever-growing flow of low-quality publications and their neg-ative consequences, based on the author’s personal experience and on scrutiny of more than 360 invitations, received over 4 months, from journals to contribute a manuscript.Methods: The requests to contribute a manuscript received by the author during 4 months were analysed for the characteristics of the journals and publishers issuing the invitations.Results: A total of 368 requests were received during 4 months (123 days), on average 3 per day, from a total of 216 journals. Of these, 164 (~76%) were no more than 10 years old, and 129 of the 162 journals (~80%) that sent an invitation to contribute have no editor-in-chief; for 12 journals (~7%), the starting year could not be ascertained. Many journals are not located where they claim to be (typically the UK or the United States) but rather in countries such as India and Singapore. Slightly more than half of 216 journals (~54%) deal with medical matters.Conclusions: Predatory journals pose a severe threat to the quality of scientific infor-mation, which is why attempts should be made to stop them. A proposal to prepare an indisputable alternative for Beall’s List of potentially predatory journals is presented.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e114977

Authors: Ljiljana Jertec Musap

Abstract: JATS XML (Journal Article Tag Suite) is an XML-based format used for publishing scholarly content. It has multiple advantages over traditional publishing methods but faces adoption challenges due to the need for relatively expensive tools and/or manual work. In 2023, the HRČAK Portal’s team enabled automatic full-text con-version from DOCX to JATS XML which does not require prior knowledge of XML nor additional tools. Created JATS facilitates content and reference mining as well as transformation to HTML. It also improves cross-device compatibility and produces interactive links for an enhanced reading experience.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e107138

Authors: Thao Trinh Thi Phuong, Tien-Trung Nguyen, Nam Nguyen Danh, Dinh Ngo Van, Hoang Dinh Luong, Le Van An Nguyen, Trung Tran

Abstract: Background: Digital transformation refers to applying digital technology in various fields of society. In the last 5 years, digital transformation has spread to most areas of social life, including education. However, research on digital transformation in education is still fragmented.Objectives: The aim of the study was to present a comprehensive review of studies on digital transformation in education using bibliometric analysis.Methods: We searched the Scopus database from inception to 1 January 2023 using the search terms ‘digital transformation’ AND ‘education’ within abstracts, keywords, or titles of journal articles or conference papers written in English. The retrieved articles were analysed using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny tools.Results: A total of 1329 relevant studies were retrieved. Although the first paper in this field was published in 1999, the number of publications has increased rapidly only in the past 4 years. The most influential countries in this field are the developed countries (Russian Federation, Germany, and the United States), but scholars from the developing countries (Indonesia and Thailand) are among the most productive. Papers on digital transformation are frequently published in journals with lower rankings within the Scopus database. Using VOSviewer for keyword co-occurrence analysis, we classified the research topics related to digital transformation in educa-tion into four main groups: digital transformation in higher education under the impact of the coronavirus disease pandemic 2019 pandemic, applying the technolo-gies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to education, digitization and digital compe-tence in education in the context of digital transformation, and learning forms using technology (for example, e-learning, m-learning, and blended learning) in higher-education institutions.Conclusions: Four research trends related to digital transformation in education were identified. These trends may also change as digital transformation continues to develop.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e106882

Authors: Hiep-Hung Pham, Thanh Thao Phan, Minh-Trang Do, Dinh-Hai Luong

Abstract: Background: Vietnam and Australia have a long-standing history of collaboration in various fields, notably education, science, and technology. However, the results of this partnership remain indeterminate.Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the current state of research coop-eration between Australia and Vietnam with reference to the following aspects: (1) increase in the number of research publications over time; (2) proportion of open access (OA) publications in total publications; (3) collaboration involving countries other than Australia and Vietnam; (4) funding sources; (5) top institutions; (6) subject areas; and (7) research topics.Methods: Scopus data set was analysed to identify those papers with two or more authors, with at least one author from Australia and at least one from Vietnam.Results: Most (nearly 84%) of research papers arising out of such collaborative research were published between 2014 and 2022 (7020 of the total of 8460 documents), and almost half (49.6%) of those are OA. Besides Australia and Vietnam, the authors of those papers were from other countries as well nor were the agencies that funded the research reported in those papers limited to Australia or Vietnam. Among the countries involved in terms of co-authorship or funding, the United States was the most influential. The institutional collaborations formed three distinct clusters, each with a varying number of members and a different university at the core (Australian in two clusters and Vietnamese in the third). Medicine was the most frequent field of collaborative research, and the most frequent topics were Vietnam, coronavirus disease 2019, and climate change.Conclusions: The findings offer useful insights to policymakers as well as to senior management of academic institutes in Vietnam and Australia. The study also extends our understanding of collaborative research between the Global North and the Global South.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e107484

Authors: Thuan Van Pham, Hien Le Thi Thu, Thanh Thi Nghiem, Hang Do Thi Thu, Can Nguyen Duc, Huy Nguyen Hoa

Abstract: Background: Plagiarism by researchers and college students in Vietnam has become a major concern for publishers. Many cases of master’s theses of graduate students in Vietnam being cancelled or their diplomas being revoked for plagiarism are recorded, and some scientists also have been warned or criticized for plagiarism or self-plagiarism.Objectives: The purpose of this study was to analyse the use in educational research of 13 popular text-matching software packages at universities in Vietnam.Methods: The study was based on semistructured interviews of 104 researchers from 18 universities in Vietnam with reference to the use of text-matching software by the researchers.Results: The three most commonly used text-matching software packages were Turnitin, DoIT, and iThenticate. Three-fourths of the 18 universities employ text-matching software and although 17 out of 104 researchers were unfamiliar with such software. Universities in Vietnam primarily require plagiarism checks for master’s theses (79 out of 104 responses) and doctoral dissertations (72 out of 104 responses). Out of 104 participants, 32 use them for graduate theses or project reports, and 45 use them for research papers and project reports.Conclusions: Many universities in Vietnam are yet to specify the requirements for use of text-matching software, and most researchers and students use it only when prompted by publishers or institutions. Researchers in educational science typically lack the financial resources and the requisite skills for using text-matching software.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e113445

Authors: Mohammad Anas Azeez, Shahab Saquib Sohail

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e112506

Authors: Sun Huh

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e112023

Authors: Piero Pollesello, Zoltán Papp

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e106656

Authors: Dejana Golenko, Evgenia Arh, Ksenija Bazdaric

Abstract: Background: Although opinions of scientists about open access and the importance of their skills in information literacy have been investigated earlier but not, to our knowledge, of those in Croatia.Objective: The objective was to analyse the opinions on open access and on open-science practices before implementing open-science policies.Methods: Scientists at the University of Rijeka (N = 1256) were invited to complete, anonymously, an online questionnaire on open science (Google Forms) in 2020 and their responses were analysed.Results: Altogether 192 participants (a response rate 15%) were involved in this study, of which 110 (57%) were women. The mean age of the participants was 42 years (stand-ard deviation 11). The participants pursued careers in biomedical (37%), social (31%), or technical (14%) sciences; 20% were early-career researchers or postdoctoral research-ers, and 80% held the rank of assistant professor or higher. Most of them (88%) agreed that journals should be open access and 77% said they would choose the open-access journal if they had to choose between two journals with similar impact factors. Most (83%) considered publishing fees (article processing charges) to be too high; fewer than half (45%) considered the impact factor to be more important than open access; and 28% believed open access journals to be of lower quality. Nearly three-fourths (74%) had published at least one article in an open access journal, and 45%, without paying any fee. Only a few (10.9%) archived their articles in institutional or national repositories; more than a quarter (27%), on their web pages; and close to half (43%), on their social networks. To obtain papers not available to read online, more than half (56%) used Sci-Hub; slightly more than half (51%) wrote to the authors; 40% asked col-leagues for help; and 35% approached a librarian.Conclusions: Most of the scientists in our study were in favour of open access but con-sidered the publication fees to be too high. Their archiving was inadequate: few used any institutional or national repositories. Therefore, the scientists need to be more information literate and require guidance and help from librarians and will benefit from training in information literacy including the principles of open access.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e102691

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract: Background: The two main bibliometric databases, namely Web of Science and Scopus, are not available for free, whereas the Dimensions is one of the new freely available bibliometric databases and is considered to be an alternative to Scopus in particular.Objectives: To compare the information on citations to articles published in European Science Editing as available in the Dimensions to that available in Scopus.Methods: Information on articles published in European Science Editing that were cited in sources published between 2020 and 2022 was analysed to compare the relevant data as given by Dimensions and Scopus.Results: Both databases were similar in terms of the number of cited articles, the number of citing articles, and the number of citations. Of the total of 35 cited articles, 3 were unique to each of the 2 databases. Of the total of 93 citing articles, 74 were found in Scopus and 75 in the Dimensions.Conclusions: Scopus and Dimensions shared an overlap of 84% in articles cited but of only 60% in the citing articles. Information on individual citing articles strongly suggests that Dimensions takes data on citing articles from CrossRef. Unfortunately, these metadata contain errors. Data on citations in the Dimension database could be made more accurate if the references appended to the citing articles listed in the Crossref database were under an open license.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e106940

Authors: Christopher H. Wortley

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e99151

Authors: Kadri Kiran, Erdem Demiröz, Hacı Ali Güleç, Müge Atakan, Cem Uzun

Abstract: Background: Although Turkey publishes more than 3000 peer-reviewed scientific journals, fewer than 5% of them are covered by major indexing databases, and only 1 of the 10 scientific journals published by Trakya University (Turkey) is among those quality journals. In November 2017, Trakya University organized a workshop titled ‘Increasing the quality of academic journals at Trakya University’, the ultimate goal of which was to bring together all stakeholders in the process of academic publishing, to review the criteria of publishing quality, and to recommend measures to enhance the quality of academic journals published from Turkey. Objectives: To review the current status of academic journals published by Trakya University in terms of international publishing standards, to devise measures to enhance their quality, and also to help other journals do the same. Methods: Information was collected from the websites of 10 academic journals pub-lished by Trakya University in the fields of natural, medical, and social sciences to assess the extent to which each journal met a set of criteria defining quality academic publishing. These journals were then compared in terms of their success in meeting those criteria.Results: No single measure can improve the quality of all the ten journals published by Trakya University. Balkan Medical Journal topped the list in that it satisfied nearly all the criteria whereas the journals that met the fewest criteria were Trakya University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, Trakya University Journal of Faculty of Letters, and Journal of Balkan Libraries Union. Timeliness in ensuring ethical standards was the criterion most often met by the journals, but all 10 failed to meet the criteria related to data accessibility and good reporting guidelines. Of the 8 crite-ria related to fairness of the blind-review processes, all 10 met 6 but none met all 8. In terms of transparency and implementation of best practices, the highest compliance was in terms of the criteria related to the name of the journal, its governing body, and archiving, but no journal made any effort to market itself, that is, to expand its circulation.Conclusions: The strengths and weaknesses of each journal with reference to the quality of academic publishing were highlighted. The method described in the paper can also be used for evaluating other journals.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e97925

Authors: Maryna Zhenchenko, Iryna Izarova, Yulia Baklazhenko

Abstract: Background: The war influences every step of the publishing process from the organ-izational structure of the journal and its business model to the psychological and financial well-being of its staff.Objectives: The main aim of our research was to collect and analyse data on how the war has changed the operation and daily lives of those who work in editorial services and how significantly it has impacted their job and work.Methods: The surveyed population comprised the staff on the scientific journals listed in the Ukrainian electronic register of the state scientific institution, namely the Ukrainian Institute of Scientific and Technical Expertise and Information. The participants were asked to complete a questionnaire designed to collect data on the background and activities of the journal during wartime.Results: Among a total of 160 respondents (a response rate of 13.2%), 85 (53.1%) expe-rienced changes in editorial structure and work, particularly evident in fewer articles (mentioned by 71, or 44.4%, respondents), a switch to working remotely owing to relo-cation of staff (38, or 23.8%, respondents), changes in the frequency of publication (34, or 21.3%, respondents), changes in the topics covered in the articles (25, or 15.6%, respondents), and staff cuts (16, or 10%, respondents).Conclusions: Ukrainian editors continued their work despite severe psychological difficulties and financial dependency. The editors expect greater support from the international community and suggestions on practical strategies to deal with the challenges without significant losses. Continuing surveys to identify problems arising from the changing conditions were also recommended.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e104148

Authors: Gengyan Tang

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e101121

Authors: Panagiotis Tsigaris, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e98101

Authors: Yuki Yamada, Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: Some journals require users to register before accessing a scientific paper, despite labelling that content as open access (OA) and free-of-charge. We refer to such cases as members-only OA (MOOA), which we contend is not ‘free’ since users are forced to ‘pay’ with personal data. Scholarly content may be accessible via MOOA to either the in-browser text (HTML) or to the archival-friendly version (PDF), or both. We suggest a four-tier typology to capture the degree of openness based on this observation. We believe that technical guidelines of OA implementation should not permit MOOA.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e78084

Authors: Emma C. Leedham Elvidge

Abstract: Background: Despite decades of work to improve gender equality in science (and other science, technology, engineering, and maths fields), gender bias still exists and has been shown to impact the retention of women in academic scientific careers. Publication of peer-reviewed articles remains a key criterion for career progression and a common marker of success in academia. Any barriers to publication faced by women may therefore impact their retention and career progression.Objectives: To investigate gender differences within one potential barrier to publication, namely the time taken in peer review, by investigating the question: ‘Is the peer review process longer for papers with (assumed) women as first authors than those with (assumed) male first authors?’Methods: Gender differences in peer review time were analysed for 1100 peer-reviewed papers published between 2006 and 2016 and selected from 5 journals covering a range of physical science disciplines and publication styles.Results: In the physical sciences, male first-authored papers outnumbered female first-authored papers 2:1. However, the analysis showed no statistical difference in the time taken for peer review between the two sets of papers.Conclusion: The time taken to peer review a paper is not linked to the gender of the paper’s first author. However, the large discrepancy in the number of papers with men as first authors compared to that with women as first authors could be a contributing factor to the attrition of women from the academic career ladder (the so-called ‘leaky pipeline’).

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e96778

Authors: Danielle S. Gash, Christopher H. Wortley

Abstract: Artwork within publications, broadly covering non-text items including graphs, diagrams, and photographs, is typically published under a copyright licence, and permission for the reproduction of such items needs to be sought. The various image rights can be difficult to navigate, especially in the era of open access, and thus at The Lancet, we have developed a streamlined workflow to guide our teams on artwork permission processes in our journals. We present a practical guide for other publishing professionals, which can be adapted to meet their resources and needs.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e99231

Authors: Sun Huh

Abstract: None

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e94153

Authors: Thomas A. Lang

Abstract: In the scientific literature, the link between an idea and its source is its reference information that allows the source to be identified and located. Not so obvious is where the source is cited in the text. Although authors are given extensive details on how to format references, they are not always taught when to cite them. Further, many are not vigilant in confirming the accuracy of the quoted information against the source or in verifying the associated reference information. In fact, discrepancies between the information cited in the text and the information actually presented in the source are common and often serious. Further, inaccuracies in references that break the link between the citation and its source are even more common. These discrepancies and inaccuracies affect the integrity of science and the validity of the citation metrics (for example, the Journal Impact Factor) that are used, rightly or wrongly, to evaluate the importance of journals and authors. Here, I discuss factors affecting when and where sources should be cited. I also consider factors that can bias the selection of sources and so interfere with the validity of citation analyses, review some considerations for evaluating a source, call attention to citation and quotation error rates, and review some strategies for reducing these errors. Finally, I summarise the most common recommendations for when, what, where, and why sources should or should not be cited.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e90942

Authors: Nguyen Hoang Thien

Abstract: The risk of bias in academic publishing is present from the first stages of the publishing process when the author creates an account and submits the manuscript, which becomes subject to the rights and power of journal editors. The author’s disclosure of certain personal information risks exposing him/her to biases for or against certain groups of authors. To reduce these potential biases, reviewers and editors involved in the assessment of author works should be prevented from accessing authors’ information until the final decision regarding publication has been made. Some information, such as authors’ ORCID details, can be requested after the article is accepted for publication. Standardizing appeal procedures and establishing protocols for handling author appeals is a necessary step in the effort to reduce publication bias. Regulations for the cover letter to editor should also be put in place to ensure that authors’ personal information is not disclosed, either explicitly or implicitly.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e89470

Authors: Olivier Pourret, Pallavi Anand, Pieter Bots, Elizabeth Cottrell, Anthony Dosseto, Ashley Gunter, David W. Hedding, Daniel Enrique Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Karen Johannesson, Jabrane Labidi, Susan Little, Haiyan Liu, Tebogo Vincent Makhubela, Johanna Marin Carbonne, Alida Perez-Fodich, Amy Riches, Romain Tartèse, Aradhna Tripati

Abstract: Background: Members of editorial boards of academic journals are often considered gatekeepers of knowledge and role models for the academic community. Editorial boards should be sufficiently diverse in the background of their members to facilitate publishing manuscripts representing a wide range of research paradigms, methods, and cultural perspectives.Objectives: To critically evaluate changes in the representation of binary gender and geographic diversity over time on the editorial boards of Chemical Geology and Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, flagship geochemistry journals, respectively, from the European Association of Geochemistry and the Geochemical Society – Meteoritical Society partnership.Methods: The composition of editorial boards was ascertained as given in the first issue of each year, over 1965–2021 for Chemical Geology and 1950–2021 for Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, and members of the editorial boards were coded for their country of affiliation (the country of origin may have been different) and for their binary gender.Results: Gender parity, limited to men and women, and the number of countries of affiliation increased steadily between the late 1980s and 2021. However, the geographic distribution remained dominated by affiliations from North America and Western Europe. The editor-in-chief or board of editors had a significant impact on the diversity of the editorial boards, and both geographic and gender diversity may evolve with nearly every newly appointed editor. However, the persistently substantial under-representation on editorial boards of affiliations outside North America and Europe is of concern and needs to be the focus of active recruitment and ongoing monitoring. This approach will ensure that traditionally low geographic diversity is increased and maintained in the future.Conclusion: Improving diversity and inclusion of editorial boards of academic journals and strengthening journal and disciplinary reputations are mutually reinforcing. Instituting a rotating editorship with emphasis on embedding broader geographic networks and more equitable international recruitment could ensure sustained and wider geographic representation and gender balance of editorial boards and promote originality and quality of published research, representing our global communities.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e95926

Authors: Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: In the academic world, despite their corrective nature, there is still a negative stigma attached to retractions, even more so if they are based on ethical infractions. Editors-in-chief and editors are role models in academic and scholarly communities. Thus, if they have multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct, this viewpoint argues that they should not serve on journals’ editorial boards. The exception is where such individuals have displayed a clear path of scholarly reform. Policy and guidance is needed by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e90552

Authors: Salim Moussa

Abstract: The question of should editors-in-chief (EICs) publish in their own journals has been hotly debated in academic spheres. Some authors have recommended that EICs should refrain from publishing articles in their own journals. They advocate for a ‘publish elsewhere’ solution. For EICs and journals, a ‘publish elsewhere’ solution is unjust, unfair, inadequate, and counterproductive. For manuscripts (co) authored by EICs, an alternative solution is to use an open peer review procedure in which reviewers’ comments are made public alongside EICs/authors’ responses. An open peer review procedure should make the submission and acceptance dates, the number of revision rounds that EICs’ articles went through, and the identities of handling editors available to readers and the general public.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e83724

Authors: Van Luong Nguyen, Dinh-Hai Luong, Hiep-Hung Pham

Abstract: Background: Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, published research from Vietnam related to the pandemic was analysed using bibliometrics.Objectives: To examine the status of research on COVID-19 by authors from Vietnam.Methods: The following bibliometric aspects were considered in the analysis: international collaboration, institutions from Vietnam and their partner institutions worldwide, subjects and topics, types of documents, and individual authors. The basis of the study was data obtained from the Scopus database between 2020 and 2021. The data were analysed using Microsoft Excel, R, and VOSviewer, and the emerging trends illustrated through descriptive analysis and science mapping. Results: Between 2020 and 2021, researchers from Vietnam co-authored 1034 documents related to COVID-19, amounting to 0.35% of the total of 296,148 such documents published worldwide as ascertained from the Scopus database. Vietnam’s top country collaborators in that research were USA, Australia, the United Kingdom, India, and Taiwan ROC. The top Vietnam institutions were Duy Tan University, Ton Duc Thang University, and the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City. The research from Vietnam covered many subjects, from medicine and natural sciences to social sciences and economics. Eight clusters of topics related to COVID-19 were identified. In terms of citations, the most highly cited documents were the outcome of collaboration with international authors. Lastly, the study ranked top authors based on either the number of publications or the number of citations. Conclusion: This study provides a preliminary picture of studies related to COVID-19 co-authored by researchers in Vietnam. The picture may help the Vietnam government in devising appropriate strategies for post-COVID-19 restoration of the country’s socio-economic status.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e95247

Authors: Ana Marusic, Matko Marusic

Abstract: We present the experience of journal editors in improving the quality of published papers. As the editors of the Croatian Medical Journal, a journal from the so-called scientific periphery, we realized, very early after the start of the journal in 1991, that our authors needed significant assistance with their articles. We worked individually with journal authors and then moved this activity to the next stage – intensive workshops for authors. The work with the journals enabled us to extend these activities to graduate and postgraduate students – future authors.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e85616

Authors: Thomas A. Lang

Abstract: In their 4000-year history, abstracts have taken several forms and represented a variety of documents. The scientific journal emerged in the 1600s and gave rise to what would become the modern scientific abstract. Here, I describe the contexts in which abstracts evolved, address the subtexts of opinions about their purpose, and review the texts of 12 kinds of abstracts. For most readers, articles do not exist beyond abstracts. However, the quality of abstracts is often poor. Inaccuracies are common, serious, widespread, and long-standing. Abstracts should inform only the choice of what to read and never what to do.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e89445

Authors: Kate Wilson

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e86910

Authors: Heather Van Epps, Olaya Astudillo, Yaiza Del Pozo Martin, Joan Marsh

Abstract: Understanding sex and gender differences is fundamental to rigorous and inclusive research, whether studying disease pathophysiology, sociodemographic determinants of health, or the benefits and harms of medical or social interventions. The inclusion of gender-diverse study populations has improved, but the reporting of sex and gender variables in research is still incomplete. The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines, published in 2016, have been widely endorsed, but few scientific journals and organizations have incorporated them into formal editorial guidance and publication policies. To facilitate monitoring of and adherence to the SAGER guidelines in Lancet journals, we carried out an informal pilot study and developed a checklist to enable rapid editorial checks, promote uptake of the guidelines by other editors and journals, and raise awareness among peer reviewers and authors. By using this checklist as part of manuscript assessment and peer-review processes, journal editors can support best reporting practices when considering sex and gender as variables, improving the generalizability of the research they publish.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e91290

Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e87545

Authors: Duleeka Knipe, Rachel Jewkes

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e90113

Authors: Olivier Pourret

Abstract: Commentary on open access

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e76261

Authors: Octavian Andronic, Alexandra Bolocan, Dan Nicolae Păduraru, Daniel Ion, Florentina Musat

Abstract: Background: Although scientific research in Romania has continued to expand over the past 20 years, it is unclear how prepared the country’s students are to be involved in research and to publish the results of their work.Objectives: To assess Romanian medical students’ level of knowledge about research integrity and research ethics.Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 187 medical students (of which 70% were women) from Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania, was performed between September 2017 and June 2018. The survey consisted of self-evaluation with respect to three aspects, namely knowledge of research in general, that of research integrity, and that of publication integrity. The self-evaluation was followed by a set of 17 questions that tested the respondent’s knowledge.Results: On average, the proportion of correct answers was 34% (range, 12%–65%). Whereas those who had assigned low grades to themselves (a score below 5) fared poorly (fewer correct answers) in the test that followed, those who rated themselves highly (a score of 5 or higher) did not fare as well as they were expected to. The majority of respondents (83%) were willing to learn more about research integrity through courses, workshops, training programmes, etc.Conclusion: The respondents showed a low level of knowledge related to both research integrity and current standards of reporting scientific research. This lacuna demonstrates the need to train students at the beginning of their academic life because more and more of them, both undergraduate and postgraduate, are likely to be involved in scientific research.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e80709

Authors: Roxanna Wang, Robin Roberts, James C Fredenburgh, Mary Cushman, Jeffrey I Weitz

Abstract: Background and objective: There is persistent men-dominated gender disparity in medical academia. Predominance of men in the editorial makeup of medical journals might contribute to this inequity. This retrospective study (2014–2019)sought to evaluate gender representation in reviewers, editors, and members of the editorial boards in 15 leading medical journals from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.Methods: We surveyed lists of reviewers, editors, and editorial board members from seven journals of internal medicine, a specialty dominated by men; three journals of obstetrics and gynaecology and two of paediatrics, specialties dominated by women; and three journals of psychiatry, a gender-balanced specialty. Information from publicly available resources was used to infer gender, and the percentages of women were calculated. Trends over time were characterized by changes in these percentages from year to year through the linear regression line fitted to the data for each journal.Results: Journals of women-dominated specialties had significantly higher proportions of women reviewers than those of men-dominated or gender-balanced specialties, with mean percentages (95% confidence interval) of 45.8% (40.5%–51.1%), 28.0% (22.3%–33.7%), and 33.8% (27.6%–40.1%), respectively (p <0.001). The proportion of women editors and editorial board members showed no statistically significant differences across the three specialties, and the percentage of women reviewers, editors, and editorial board members increased only slightly over time.Conclusion: These results suggest that the fifteen journals are yet to achieve gender parity in their reviewers, editors, and editorial board members, and continued efforts are needed to achieve gender balance in those three groups of medical academia.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e73949

Authors: Zahra Zolfaghari, Nasrin Shokrpour, Leila Ghahramani, Pooneh Sarveravan

Abstract: Background: Citations are considered a measure of the scientific impact of research articles. CiteScore is a standard metric, based on the Scopus database, of the number of times articles in a given journal were cited during a given period relative to the number of articles published by that journal during that period.Objectives: To investigate the factors associated with CiteScores of journals on cardiology and cardiovascular diseases and indexed in Scopus in 2019.Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study examined 338 journals to analyse the correlation between CiteScore and such other variables and parameters as coverage by indexing services (databases), type of access, language, type of published articles, age of the journal (year of establishment), H-Index, Scimago Journal Rank, and the quartile of the journal.Results: CiteScore of a journal was positively correlated to the following variables or parameters: coverage by PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE (p < 0.001), articles in English (p < 0.001), age of the journal (p = 0.001), publishing review articles (p = 0.23), H-Index (p < 0.001), and Scimago Journal Rank (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Coverage of a journal in international databases, especially in PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE, is critical to increasing its visibility. Publishing review articles, which tend to be cited more often because they serve as comprehensive sources of information, can increase the CiteScore of a journal. Also, publishing more articles in English contributes to the number of times articles in a journal are cited.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e83943

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract: In this communication, the calls for standardizing citation styles are discussed. Instead of standardizing citation style, I consider efforts to introduce style-free references to be more beneficial to authors.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e71240

Authors: Necdet Sut, Zafer Koçak, Selcuk Korkmaz, Cem Uzun

Abstract: Background: Published reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not compliant with the CONSORT checklist as much as they should.Objective: To assess the quality, in terms of the level to which they are compliant with the CONSORT checklist, of abstracts of RCTs published in general medical journals in the Balkan region.Methods: Two observers assessed the abstracts of RCTs published in five general medical journals of the Balkan region between 2012 and 2018 to determine the level to which the abstracts were compliant with the 16-item CONSORT abstracts checklist.Results: Of the 183 studies that were identified for evaluation, 124 (67.8%) were excluded from the evaluation. The average compliance level was 44.5% (95% CI: 41.9%–47.1%), the lowest being that for randomization (1.7%), funding (1.7%),numbers analysed (11.0%), blinding (13.6%), and trial registration (18.6%). However, the compliance level was very high for conclusions (99.2%), objectives (96.6%), interventions (95.8%), and primary outcomes (83.9%). The length of the abstract (word count) and the level of compliance were positively correlated (rs = 0.43; p = 0.001). Abstracts of trials published in journals that endorse CONSORT in their publication policies were more compliant than those published in other journals (47.5 ± 10.4 versus 40.8 ± 8.0, p = 0.024).Conclusion: The overall level of compliance with the CONSORT checklist was below 50%. To improve the quality of abstracts of RCTs, authors should be encouraged to use the CONSORT checklist, and editors should check compliance with the CONSORT guidelines as part the publishing workflow.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e79315

Authors: Erin Foley, Rachel Moriarty, Kerys Martin

Abstract: Background: The Early Career Publishers Committee (ECPC) of the STM Association (the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers)’s Early Career Publishers Committee (ECPC) aims to engage, and provide tools and resources for, early-career publishers (ECPs) and professionals. The committee believes it is important to survey the community regularly to understand the background, needs, and concerns of its members to better achieve the committee’s goals.Objectives: Early-career professionals were surveyed in 2014 and 2020: the first survey was undertaken to get a baseline understanding of the community and to guide the newly formed ECPC whereas the second not only sought to review some aspects of the first survey but also to identify and explore ways to improve engagement and support through new or revised survey questions.Methods: The two surveys were conducted online through the ECPC mailing list and social networks. The surveys were voluntary, with the option to skip some questions, and responses – some in the form of a rating scale – were collected anonymously. Each survey remained open for over a month to maximize responses, but neither was pretested. Some questions in the first survey were revised in the second in the light of learnings from the first survey.Results: Most of respondents were women, 25–54 years old, from the UK or the US, with higher degrees, and working in editorial roles. In the second survey, many respondents were interested in developing their career either in their current role or in a different one, and nearly half were actively seeking a new role. Over half said that finding the right role was a challenge. Many had never participated in a publishing-related mentoring scheme, and most had not heard of the STM mentoring scheme before.Conclusions: More tools, resources, and outreach for entry-level and younger industry members, for those from countries outside the UK and US, and for those seeking to develop their careers may be useful in the future. The mentoring scheme could be publicized more prominently to drive engagement. A new survey will be needed in the next 2–3 years, given the potential impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic on the number of respondents in the second (2020) survey and their motivation.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e81677

Authors: Cary Moskovitz, Michael Pemberton, Susanne Hall

Abstract: Because science advances incrementally, scientists often need to repeat material included in their prior work when composing new texts. Such “text recycling” is a common but complex writing practice, so authors and editors need clear and consistent guidance about what constitutes appropriate practice. Unfortunately, publishers’ policies on text recycling to date have been incomplete, unclear, and sometimes internally inconsistent. Building on 4 years of research on text recycling in scientific writing, the Text Recycling Research Project has developed a model text recycling policy that should be widely applicable for research publications in scientific fields. This article lays out the challenges text recycling poses for editors and authors, describes key factors that were addressed in developing the policy, and explains the policy’s main features.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e83864

Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva

Abstract: The European Union (EU), and Europe more widely, is facing its largest socio-political threat in a generation. As the political events between Russia and Ukraine, which have been festering since at least 2014, have now turned into a war, with many major Western and EU companies barring business with Russia, and with most Western Governments imposing increasingly stiffer sanctions on Russia, where do non-Russian academic publishers stand? This commentary takes a brief look at what we know, and where we stand. A humanitarian response is needed, but so too is a decision regarding treatment of Russian and Ukrainian academics.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e84992

Authors: Duncan Nicholas

Abstract: The European Association of Science Editors statement on the invasion of Ukraine includes details of support for the Association's Ukrainian members and all peoples of Ukraine, condemnation of the Russian invasion, and advocacy for research and scholarly publishing industry initiatives to support continued academic activity.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e77781

Authors: Tanja Vuckovic Juros

Abstract: Open science offers hope for new accountability and transparency in social sciences. Nevertheless, it still fails to fully consider the complexities of qualitative research, as exemplified by a reflection on sensitive qualitative data sharing. As a result, the developing patterns of rewards and sanctions promoting open science raise concern that quantitative research, whose “replication crisis” brought the open science movement to life, will benefit from “good science” re-evaluations at the expense of other research epistemologies, despite the necessity to define accountability and transparency in social sciences more widely and not to conflate those with either reproducibility or data sharing.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e79945

Authors: Daniel Rozell

Abstract:

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e76113

Authors: Christopher Baethge

Abstract: Effective 30 June 2021, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, ICMJE, has updated its disclosure form. It is now public on ICMJE’s web page, and member journals have started using the form. In the ICMJE, editors of general medical journals discuss and adopt proposals to address important problems in medical publishing, such as authorship definition, trial registration, data sharing, and the declaration of conflict of interest. All of ICMJE’s proposals are summarized in the “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals”, a 19-page document containing advice on a wide variety of topics related to manuscript writing and publishing.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e64274

Authors: Okan Aydoğan, Gizem Kayan-Tekaüt

Abstract: Background: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) is one of the most important indexes that medical journals aspire to be covered by. Currently, SCIE indexes 14,840 peer-reviewed journals across 178 disciplines. Among these journals are 3445 medical journals, divided into more than 40 subject categories.Objectives: To reveal the impact and contribution of medical journals from Balkan countries through the Journal Impact Factor of those journals, the number of articles published by them, and the number of times those articles have been cited.Methods: Balkan countries are countries that fall or fully or partly within the Balkan peninsula. All medical journals from those countries listed in the SCIE were ranked based on cumulative citations between 2000 and 2020. Among them, the top 50 journals in terms of cumulative citations were chosen for the study, which analysed the data on 129,259 research articles and reviews that covered 27 different subject categories within the broad field of medicine. The countries were Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Greece, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, and TurkeyResults: The top 50 journals included those published from eight Balkan countries. Turkey had the most journals (21) in the Web of Science (WoS) and Greece had 13 but, when ranked in terms of the number of journals in WoS per million people, Croatia topped the list, with 1.22 journals per million of its population, followed by Greece (1.21 journals). The top-cited journals were Anticancer Research (206,226 citations), International Journal of Oncology (171,654), Oncology Reports (157,467), Molecular Medicine Reports (82,009), and Oncology Letters (69,161). Oncology was the most cited subject category and Croatia, the country with maximum interaction with other Balkan countries, that is, papers in Croatian journals cited journals published from the maximum number of Balkan counties.Conclusion: The study provides insights into the last two decades of progress in academic publishing and in the performances of medical journals published from Balkan countries.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e76284

Authors: Jocalyn Clark, Reshma Jagsi

Abstract: To meet the needs of their wide-ranging audiences, journals and editors must publish science that reflects the diversity of the communities they serve. And yet we collectively neglect the importance of optimizing the diversity of peer reviewers. This viewpoint explores the vital economy and identity of peer reviewers, and how these can help improve diversity in peer review. Economy, because this form of labour props up a publishing system, doling out the main form of currency within academia, and identity, because what peer reviewers contribute extends beyond their disciplinary expertise to their sense of self and what they represent: the backgrounds, values, and views they bring to the work of reviewing scientific papers.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e69596

Authors: Rabia Gönül Sezer Yamanel, Pınar Kumru, Semra Kayataş Eser, Ayşenur Celayir

Abstract: Background: Many physicians in Turkey are both clinicians and researchers, and publishing their research contributes to better patient care as well as to career advancement.Objective: To identify the barriers faced by Turkish physicians to writing research papers and getting them published.Methods: Respondents were asked, through eight multiple-choice questions, about the difficulties they faced in writing research papers and in getting them published in journals. We also searched published literature for accounts of similar difficulties and answers to the question ‘What is your purpose in writing scientific publications?’Results: A total of 18% (155 of 871) of physicians completed the questionnaire. About the difficulties faced in writing, 82 out of the 155 participants, or 57%, reported problems in finding financial support; 58 (40%), in obtaining required permissions and clearances; 65 (45%), in acquiring relevant skills, especially those related to data analysis or statistics; and 42 (29%), in language-related skills. About the difficulties in getting their papers published in journals, 85 (60%) said that they tried to overcome the difficulties by searching for appropriate solutions on the internet; 66 (47%) sought help from experienced colleagues; and 47 (33%) needed professional help in English translation and editing. Need for financial support was reported by a significantly (p = 0.04) larger proportion of associate professors or full professors (69%) than that of residents (47%) and fellows (45%).Conclusion: The main problems that Turkish physicians face in preparing scientific manuscripts were lack of financial support, inadequate knowledge of data analysis and statistics, and the paperwork involved in obtaining required approvals and permissions—problems that were common to the departments of internal medicine and of surgery. The primary motivation for writing and publishing was career advancement, especially through promotion to a higher academic rank.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e75834

Authors: Libor Ansorge

Abstract: The digital age has enabled unprecedented opportunities in the dissemination of information. Thanks to the Internet, research results are available to virtually anyone in the world. Thanks to platforms such as the Open Journal System, a scientific journal can be published by practically anyone with minimal demands on resources, and even a relatively small editorial team can focus more on the quality of published articles than on the editorial process itself. Nevertheless, publishing procedures have recently been adopted which do not allow parts of readers to have seamless access to the content of scientific articles.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e72187

Authors: Joseph El Khoury, Riwa Kanj, Lynn Adam, Rama Kanj, Abdul Jalil Hajaig, Firas Haddad, Rita Christie El Helou

Abstract: Background: Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been consistently under-represented in the pool of contributors to academic journals on health. For the past two decades, prominent voices within the psychiatric profession have called for better representation of LMICs in the interest of advancing the understanding of mental health globally and benefiting health systems in these countries.Objective: To investigate the absolute and relative representation of authors affiliated to institutes from LMICs in the most influential journals on mental health in 2019.Method: Thirty top-ranking journals on mental health based on Scimago Journal Rank were selected, and all papers other than correspondence and letters to the editor published in those journals in 2019 were examined to extract the country of affiliation of each of their authors and their position (corresponding author, first author, second author).Results: Of the 4022 articles examined, 3720 articles (92.5%) were written exclusively by authors from high-income countries (HICs); 302 (7.5%) featured one or more authors from a LMIC along with those from HICs; 91 (2.2%) featured authors only from one LMIC; and only 3 (0.07%) featured authors from more than one LMICs but without any co-author from a HIC. The ratio of articles by contributors from LMICs to all the articles published in 2019 in a given journal ranged from 0% to 19%. Of 1855 individual contributors from 45 LMICs, 1050 (56%) were from China.Conclusion: Despite the growth of the global health movement and frequent calls for academic inclusivity, LMICs were significantly under-represented among the authors of papers published in top-ranking journals on mental health in 2019.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e75625

Authors: Stephan Mertens, Alastair Brown

Abstract: Human impacts on the Earth have become so pervasive as to drive global scale changes leading some scientists to propose a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. A name which reflects the huge and sweeping changes human activities have caused to the Earth. Furthermore, these rapidly expanding and accelerating activities threaten to push aspects of the Earth system beyond the relatively stable and safe space in which the entirety of human history occurred, the Holocene. This safe operating space is characterised by a set of nine planetary boundaries1 within which humanity should be able to continue to develop and thrive for generations to come. These include: climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical flows and freshwater use. Crossing these boundaries risks generating large-scale, rapid or irreversible environmental changes.Reducing the environmental impact of our activities in order to keep within a safe operating space for humanity and the linked goal of providing a basic social foundation for everyone requires global actions. Every individual, company, institution and organisation, whether large or small, public or private, needs to contribute – ‘think global, act local’. Scientific publishing as a key player in discussing and disseminating research on climate heating and the biodiversity crisis has transformed from print to digital journals and e-books over recent decades but we must do more.The European Association of Science Editors (EASE) is an international community of individuals and associations engaged in science communication and editing. As such, EASE can help and support its members to engage in different ways to achieve and communicate efforts to reduce our environmental footprints for example by becoming carbon neutral (or even carbon negative) irrespective of the type of organisation they work in.Below are some suggestions for how editors can take steps to reduce their environmental footprint in their own particular circumstances and thereby contribute to the overall effort to reduce environmental damages. Not all suggestions will be relevant to everyone and structural or organisational change will have a greater impact than individual actions, but together we can make a difference.

HTML

XML

PDF