
<rss version="0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Latest Articles from European Science Editing</title>
        <description>Latest 29 Articles from European Science Editing</description>
        <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 6 Jun 2026 23:36:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Pensoft FeedCreator</generator>
        
	
		<item>
		    <title>Open access publishing in Vietnam’s engineering and technology sector: trends and key funding sources</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/168651/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 52: e168651</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e168651</p>
					<p>Authors: Ngoc-Thi-Bich Tran, Trung-Thanh Nguyen, Dinh-Hai Luong, Hiep-Hung Pham</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Over the past decade, open access (OA) publishing has gained increasing prominence in higher education systems worldwide. In Vietnam, this shift has been particularly visible within engineering and technology (E&amp;T) universities, in which the requirement that students publish in international journals and the availability of funding have become central to research evaluation. Understanding how OA publishing has evolved and how funding patterns support this development is essential to assessing changes in research dissemination within the academic sector.Objectives: This study aimed to (1) analyse the growth of OA publications in Vietnamese E&amp;T universities between 2013 and 2024 in relation to national policy reforms on international publication requirements, (2) identify the predominant OA publishing models, and (3) analyse patterns in funding sources that support OA publications and implications of these funding sources for researchers&rsquo; choices of outlets for publishing.Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using publication data retrieved from the Scopus database from 2013 to 2024. The study assessed the distribution of OA publications, the relative prevalence of different models of OA (Gold, Green, etc.) and the extent of funding support for OA articles.Results: Open access publishing remained modest before 2017 but increased sharply after 2018, coinciding with the introduction of stricter requirements for publishing internationally for doctoral training, eligibility for being a research supervisor, and career advancement. Gold OA emerged as the dominant publishing model in the later years of the study period. Nearly two-thirds (63.3%) of OA publications acknowledged financial support, with domestic public agencies, particularly the National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) and the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET), forming the primary funding base, complemented by international collaborative sponsors.Conclusions: Open access publishing is becoming the norm in Vietnam&rsquo;s E&amp;T universities more because of policies and funding than because of isolated individual initiatives. The growing prominence of Gold OA reflects the interaction between policy-driven incentives, institutional strategies, and the availability of funding. These findings highlight the importance of sustaining and strategically aligning funding mechanisms to support OA publishing in research systems in developing countries.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/168651/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/168651/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2026 10:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Creating a writing and dissemination toolkit for faculty scholarly writing and publishing</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/183055/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 52: e183055</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e183055</p>
					<p>Authors: Mary Hannah-Griebel, Amy Minix</p>
					<p>Abstract: Dissemination of research is an important component of a successful nursing career, and research shows that providing faculty with resources that facilitate publication can increase their productivity. The authors identified gaps in publication resources available to faculty at Indiana University School of Nursing in Bloomington and created a toolkit to fill those gaps. The purpose of this article is to introduce the Writing and Dissemination Toolkit and discuss the resources provided. A template of the toolkit is available and is customisable for use by faculty, staff, or students at other institutions.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/183055/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/183055/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Viewpoint</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Standard terminology for peer review: commenting and proposing the inclusion of two new categories</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/165929/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 52: e165929</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e165929</p>
					<p>Authors: Janaynne Carvalho do Amaral</p>
					<p>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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/165929/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/165929/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Viewpoint</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2026 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Balancing principles and practices: Disciplinary differences in Croatian researchers’ attitudes to open-access publishing.</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/145158/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 51: e145158</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e145158</p>
					<p>Authors: Lea Škorić, Miroslav Rajter, Bojan Macan, Jelka Petrak</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Researchers&rsquo; attitudes to, and use of, open access publishing are shaped by many factors, including the characteristics of scientific disciplines &ndash; whether STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine) or SSH (Social Sciences and Humanities) &ndash; 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 &ndash; STEM and SSH &ndash; 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&rsquo;s reputation. However, researchers in STEM tended to prioritize the journal&rsquo;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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/145158/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/145158/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Visibility and research impact of Bulgarian geographers: insights from indexing databases and social media platforms</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/120210/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 51: e120210</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e120210</p>
					<p>Authors: Hristina Prodanova, Stelian Dimitrov</p>
					<p>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 &ndash; the University of Veliko Tarnovo and Shumen University &ndash; were visible mostly on ResearchGate and Google Scholar. Overall visibility of each institution on social media was very low (8%&ndash;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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/120210/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/120210/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Evaluating award-winning doctoral theses to reveal PhD research landscape: A case study of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/136050/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 51: e136050</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2025.e136050</p>
					<p>Authors: Petar Milovanovic, Ranka Stankovic, Vukan Ivanovic, Ana Petrovic, Vladimir Nikolic, Katarina Milutinovic, Marija Jeremic, Lazar Davidovic, Nebojsa Lalic, Tatjana Pekmezovic</p>
					<p>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&ndash;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 &lt; .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 &gt; .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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/136050/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/136050/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Social science research in Indonesia (1999–2023): Identifying hotspots and trends through bibliometrics</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/132218/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 50: e132218</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e132218</p>
					<p>Authors: Prakoso Bhairawa Putera, Amelya Gustina, Reny Nirmala, Azhar Azhar, Nengyanti Nengyanti</p>
					<p>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 &ndash; particularly narrative research &ndash; 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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/132218/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/132218/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2024 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Publishers and production of academic books in Mexico: 2013-2019.</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123288/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 50: e123288</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e123288</p>
					<p>Authors: Esteban Giraldo-González, Edgar García-Valencia, Juan Felipe Córdoba-Restrepo, Elea Giménez-Toledo</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: The project Cartograf&iacute;a de la Edici&oacute;n Acad&eacute;mica 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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123288/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123288/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Proposing authorship for artificial intelligence and large language models</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123908/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 50: e123908</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e123908</p>
					<p>Authors: Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva</p>
					<p>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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123908/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/123908/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Viewpoint</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 2 Sep 2024 11:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Bibliometric analysis of publications trends in Indonesian research institutions: A comparison of pre-integration (2015–2021) and post-integration (2022–2023) periods</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/118015/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 50: e118015</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2024.e118015</p>
					<p>Authors: Setiowiji Handoyo, Poppy Indah Dwi Prastiti, Iwan Ridwan Stiaji</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Institutional transformation &ndash; integrating many disparate research institutes into the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN, for Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional) &ndash; 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&ndash;2023. However, the annual rate of growth after (2021&ndash;2023) the integration of research institutions was higher (36%) than that before (2015&ndash;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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/118015/">HTML</a></p>
					
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/118015/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Predatory activities require coordinated action by publisher’ and editors’ organizations: a case report</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e113535</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e113535</p>
					<p>Authors: A.J. (Tom) van Loon</p>
					<p>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&rsquo;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&rsquo;s List of potentially predatory journals is presented.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113535/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:18:46 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Digital transformation in education: a bibliometric analysis using Scopus</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/107138/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e107138</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e107138</p>
					<p>Authors: Thao Trinh Thi Phuong, Tien-Trung Nguyen, Nam Nguyen Danh, Dinh Ngo Van, Hoang Dinh Luong, Le Van An Nguyen, Trung Tran</p>
					<p>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 &lsquo;digital transformation&rsquo; AND &lsquo;education&rsquo; 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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/107138/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/107138/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/107138/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Correspondence to “the role of ChatGPT in scholarly editing and publishing”</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113445/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e113445</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e113445</p>
					<p>Authors: Mohammad Anas Azeez, Shahab Saquib Sohail</p>
					<p>Abstract: </p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113445/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113445/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/113445/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Correspondence</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2023 08:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Opinion on open-science practices and the importance of scientists’ information literacy skills in context of open science at the University of Rijeka, Croatia – a cross-sectional study</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/106656/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e106656</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e106656</p>
					<p>Authors: Dejana Golenko, Evgenia Arh, Ksenija Bazdaric</p>
					<p>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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/106656/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/106656/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/106656/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2023 07:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Citation coverage by Dimensions and Scopus of articles published in European Science Editing</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/102691/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e102691</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e102691</p>
					<p>Authors: Libor Ansorge</p>
					<p>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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/102691/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/102691/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/102691/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2023 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>The role of ChatGPT in scholarly editing and publishing</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/101121/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 49: e101121</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2023.e101121</p>
					<p>Authors: Panagiotis Tsigaris, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva</p>
					<p>Abstract: </p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/101121/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/101121/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/101121/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Correspondence</category>
		    <pubDate>Wed, 3 May 2023 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title> Publications on COVID-19 from Vietnam during 2020 and 2021: A bibliometric analysis</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/83724/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 48: e83724</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e83724</p>
					<p>Authors: Van Luong Nguyen, Dinh-Hai Luong, Hiep-Hung Pham</p>
					<p>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&rsquo;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&rsquo;s socio-economic status.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/83724/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/83724/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/83724/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Dec 2022 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>CiteScores of cardiology and cardiovascular journals indexed in Scopus in 2019: A bibliometric analysis</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/73949/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 48: e73949</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2022.e73949</p>
					<p>Authors: Zahra Zolfaghari, Nasrin Shokrpour, Leila Ghahramani, Pooneh Sarveravan</p>
					<p>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 &lt; 0.001), articles    in English (p &lt; 0.001), age of the journal (p = 0.001), publishing review articles (p =  0.23), H-Index (p &lt; 0.001), and Scimago Journal Rank (p &lt; 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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/73949/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/73949/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/73949/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 9 Jun 2022 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Top 50 medical journals from Balkan countries: A bibliometric analysis, 2000–2020</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/64274/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e64274</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e64274</p>
					<p>Authors: Okan Aydoğan, Gizem Kayan-Tekaüt</p>
					<p>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 &amp; 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.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/64274/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/64274/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/64274/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>The need for a new set of measures to assess the impact of research in earth sciences in Indonesia</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59032/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e59032</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e59032</p>
					<p>Authors: Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Juneman Abraham, Jonathan Peter Tennant, Olivier Pourret</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Earth sciences is one of those sensitive field sciences that are closely needed to solve local problems within local physical and social settings. Earth researchers find state-of-the-art of topics in earth sciences by using scientific databases, conduct research on the topics, and write about them. However, the accessibility, readability, and usability of those articles for local communities are major problems in measuring the impact of research, although it may be covered by well-known international scientific databases.Objectives: To ascertain empirically whether there are differences in document distribution, in the proportions of openly accessible documents, and in the geographical coverage of earth sciences topics as revealed through analyses of documents retrieved from scientific databases and to propose new measures for assessing the impact of research in earth sciences based on those differences.Methods: Relevant documents were retrieved using &lsquo;earth sciences&rsquo; as a search term in English and other languages from ten databases of scientific publications. The results of these searches were analysed using frequency analysis and a quantitative- descriptive design.Results: (1) The number of articles in English from international databases exceeded the number of articles in native languages from national-level databases. (2) The number of open-access (OA) articles in the national databases was higher than that in other databases. (3) The geographical coverage of earth science papers was uneven between countries when the number of documents retrieved from closed-access commercial databases was compared to that from the other databases. (4) The regulations in Indonesia related to promotion of lecturers assign greater weighting to publications indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science (WoS) and publications in journals with impact factors are assigned a higher weighting.Conclusions: The dominance of scientific articles in English as well as the paucity of OA publications indexed in international databases (compared to those in national or regional databases) may have been due to the greater weighting assigned to such publications. Consequently, the relevance of research reported in those publications to local communities has been questioned. This article suggests some open-science practices to transform the current regulations related to promotion into a more responsible measurement of research performance and impact.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59032/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59032/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/59032/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 8 Jul 2021 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences </title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e63663</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e63663</p>
					<p>Authors: Olivier Pourret, David William Hedding, Daniel Enrique Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Haiyan Liu, Jonathan Peter Tennant</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Open access (OA) implies free and unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, OA publishing has seen a new wave of interest, debate, and practices surrounding that mode of publishing.Objectives: To provide an overview of publication practices and to compare them among six countries across the world to stimulate further debate and to raise awareness about OA to facilitate decision-making on further development of OA practices in earth sciences.Methods: The number of OA articles, their distribution among the six countries, and top ten journals publishing OA articles were identified using two databases, namely Scopus and the Web of Science, based mainly on the data for 2018.Results: In 2018, only 24%&ndash;31% of the total number of articles indexed by either of the databases were OA articles. Six of the top ten earth sciences journals that publish OA articles were fully OA journals and four were hybrid journals. Fully OA journals were mostly published by emerging publishers and their article processing charges ranged from $1000 to $2200.Conclusions: The rise in OA publishing has potential implications for researchers and tends to shift article-processing charges from organizations to individuals. Until the earth sciences community decides to move away from journal-based criteria to evaluate researchers, it is likely that such high costs will continue to maintain financial inequities within this research community, especially to the disadvantage of researchers from the least developed countries. However, earth scientists, by opting for legal self- archiving of their publications, could help to promote equitable and sustainable access to, and wider dissemination of, their work.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Obstacles to health care research projects at the University of Jordan: a cross-sectional survey</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/61658/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e61658</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e61658</p>
					<p>Authors: Randa Farah, Saif Aldeen AlRyalat, Wala'a Aburumman, Dana Sakaji, Muna Alhusban, Reem Hamasha, Majd Alkhrissat, Mohammad Qablawi, Ayat Alni’mat</p>
					<p>Abstract: Objective: To assess the obstacles faced by biomedical researchers in Jordan and the reasons behind the stagnation of health care research.Background: Health care research is essential for the advancement of medical care but faces obstacles that delay the completion of research projects, and the literature is still deficient, especially in developing countries.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of all academic staff of health care faculties at the University of Jordan who had been employed for five years or more and had at least one stagnant research project. Questionnaires were completed by the academic staff online using Google Forms after a face-to-face interview to explain the study process to them.Results: A total of 82 researchers with a mean age of 42.68 (&plusmn;9.16) years were included most of whom (84.1%) had only one stagnant project. Of the 106 stagnant projects, 28.3% were in the basic sciences and 71.7% were in clinical research. Almost a third (29.5%) of the projects remained stagnant after reaching the publication stage. Most researchers (81.3%) identified lack of time and high workload as the most common personal barriers and 44.4% identified lack of funds and research incentives as the most common institutional barriers.Conclusions: Medical research is affected by different barriers including lack of time, high workload, lack of funds, and insufficient incentives for research. An institutional strategic plan is required to overcome those barriers and to improve medical research.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/61658/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/61658/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/61658/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Errata and retractions associated with research papers published by authors with Hungarian affiliations</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/60203/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e60203</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e60203</p>
					<p>Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva, Mohammadamin Erfanmanesh</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: To examine the errata and retractions in total published output of Hungarian research and academia relative to that in 34 other European countries.Objective: To analyse the number of errata and retractions related to papers published by authors with Hungarian affiliations compared to those by authors with affiliations in the 34 other countries.Methods: Errata and retractions retrieved from three databases, namely Retraction Watch, Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus, were counted and sorted by country.Results: Scopus featured 7 retractions linked to Hungarian affiliations and WoS featured 10. Retraction Watch featured 26 such retractions, placing Hungary in 23rd position among the 35 countries arranged in descending order of the number of retractions. Of the 26 retractions from Hungary, 5 were in Elsevier journals and another 5 in Springer Nature; also, 8 of the 26 were associated with the University of Debrecen. When ranked for the number of errata notices for every 1000 published papers, Hungary was ranked 29th in WoS (2.54 notices per 1000 papers) and 26th in Scopus (2.3 notices per 1000 papers).Conclusions: The low numbers of Hungarian affiliations suggest that either research ethics are more stringently observed in Hungary or that publications from Hungarian research institutes, including papers in Hungarian &ndash; many Hungarian journals are indexed neither in WoS nor in Scopus &ndash; have not been scrutinized adequately through post-publication peer review.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/60203/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/60203/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/60203/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 8 Apr 2021 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Online course in conjunction with face-to-face workshops to improve writing skills leading towards more publications in peer reviewed journals</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54417/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 47: e54417</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e54417</p>
					<p>Authors: Amon P Shoko, Ismael A Kimirei, Baraka C Sekadende, Mary A Kishe, Innocent E Sailale</p>
					<p>Abstract: Background: Researchers in the developing countries often have inadequate scientific writing skills to publish their research in international peer reviewed journals.Objectives: To improve the research-and proposal-writing skills of researchers and to evaluate the impact of this intervention.Methods: An off-the-shelf online course (AuthorAID, developed by INASP) was embedded in the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute&rsquo;s (TAFIRI) website and offered to the institute researchers in Tanzania. The 8-week course was followed by a 2-day face- to-face workshop that used the course material contextualized to local conditions, and the combination was repeated one more time.Results: A total of 47 participants completed the course and attended the workshop: 21 (54%) completed the course in 2016 and 26 (67%) in 2017. The number of papers published annually by TAFIRI staff more than tripled between 2016 and 2019 after the AuthorAID intervention, most of them (114, or 91%) by researchers who had undergone the training.Conclusion: Embedding and contextualizing proven learning materials, such as the AuthorAID online course, can be an economical and effective approach to improving the writing skills of scientists in developing countries.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54417/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54417/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54417/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 1 Feb 2021 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Exploring the relationship between journal indexing and article processing charges of journals published by MDPI, the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54523/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 46: e54523</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e54523</p>
					<p>Authors: Hilary Okagbue, Jaime Teixeira da Silva, Timothy Anake</p>
					<p>Abstract: The Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) is a prominent open access (OA) publisher that uses article processing charges (APCs) as its business model. Our objective was to determine the association between the APCs levied by MDPI journals and 1) their inclusion in Scopus and Web of Science databases or 2) their stature, as represented by their CiteScore (Elsevier&rsquo;s Scopus) and Impact Factor (awarded by Clarivate Analytics). Among the 227 journals published by MDPI, 51 had both IF and CiteScore; 107, only a CiteScore; and 84, neither IF nor CiteScore. The charges levied by the journals varied widely, from 0 to CHF 2000 (Swiss francs), the most frequent figure (159 journals) being CHF 1000, or about &euro;930. The amount of APCs was found to be correlated to IF (R&sup2; = 0.64; p &lt;0.001; 107 journals) and also to CiteScore (R&sup2; = 0.619; p &lt;0.001; 53 journals). The charges levied by journals that had both IF and CiteScore were significantly higher than those charged by journals with neither IF nor CiteScore (p &lt;0.05). The charges were also correlated to the age of the journal: the more recently launched journals charged less than the older journals did.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54523/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54523/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/54523/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Rethinking editorial management and productivity in the COVID-19 pandemic</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/56541/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 46: e56541</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e56541</p>
					<p>Authors: Quan-Hoang Vuong, Manh-Toan Ho</p>
					<p>Abstract: The indirect costs of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically extended work absenteeism and possible loss of productivity, are discussed focusing on the research community and its publishing. We suggest that the community should learn strategic and innovative decision-making as well as crisis management from business management to think ahead, especially about working effectively and being productive in times of crisis. The main challenges are:1) communicating scientific and credible information about the pandemic,2) focusing on being productive to provide some certainty, and3) adopting a new mindset and being open to unexpected opportunities.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/56541/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/56541/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/56541/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Viewpoint</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Web of Science and Scopus are not global databases of knowledge</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51987/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 46: e51987</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e51987</p>
					<p>Authors: Jonathan P. Tennant</p>
					<p>Abstract: Both Web of Science and Scopus are critical components of the current research ecosystem, providing the basis for university and global rankings as well as for bibliometric research. However, both platforms are structurally biased against research produced in non-Western countries, non-English language research, and research from the arts, humanities, and social sciences. This viewpoint emphasizes the damage that these systematic inequities inflict upon global knowledge production systems and the need for research funders to unite to form a more globally representative, non-profit, community-controlled infrastructure for the global pool of research knowledge.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51987/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51987/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/51987/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Viewpoint</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Suggestions for fortifying the discoverability of papers published in European Science Editing</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/57377/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 46: e57377</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e57377</p>
					<p>Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva</p>
					<p>Abstract: European Science Editing (ESE), a platinum open access journal, is gaining recognition as one of the prime outlets for publishing-related topics, as evidenced by its 2019 rise into the second quarter of Scimago&rsquo;s Journal Rankings and by its Scopus CiteScore of 1.3. However, the discoverability of knowledge and information in ESE is currently limited by the fact that manuscripts published before 2003 are not indexed, that none of the papers published before May 2016 have a DOI, and that not all information that appears on the html version of a paper appears on its PDF version, and vice versa. Finally, because ESE is already indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals, all papers should be archived on that platform. Such improvements would undoubtedly take time and some resources, but if they could be achieved, the discoverability of the journal would clearly be fortified.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/57377/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/57377/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/57377/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Correspondence</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Russia and post-Soviet countries compared: coverage of papers by Scopus and Web of Science, languages, and productivity of researchers</title>
		    <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/article/53192/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>European Science Editing 46: e53192</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e53192</p>
					<p>Authors: Natalia Alimova, Yuri Brumshteyn</p>
					<p>Abstract: Objective: To analyse the productivity of post-Soviet countries, adjusted by population, in terms of research papers published and the proportions of those papers indexed by Scopus and the Web of Science.Methods: Relevant data on the journals indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science were analysed. Where required, data were also extracted from Russian Science Citation Index databases and websites of journals.Results: On average, the post-Soviet countries had 31 researchers per 10,000 people. The average numbers of publications per researcher in journals indexed by Scopus was 1.04 and the corresponding figure for the Web of Science was 0.87. In terms of the number of journals indexed in Scopus and the Web of Science, the leading countries were Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.Conclusion: Although the post-Soviet countries differed considerably in terms of bibliometric indices, the overall values were low. Main features of the journals were as follows: articles published in national languages &ndash; in Russian in many cases &ndash; and in English, articles mostly by authors within the region, and only a minority of foreigners as members of editorial boards. Thus most of the journals cannot be considered international. All the journals examined have websites in a national language and/or in English and invariably carry information on ethical practices, although such information is not given in a uniform format and varies from country to country.</p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/53192/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/53192/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://ese.arphahub.com/article/53192/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Original Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>
	