
<rss version="0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Latest Articles from European Science Editing</title>
        <description>Latest 10 Articles from European Science Editing</description>
        <link>https://ese.arphahub.com/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 6 Sep 2026 23:43:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Pensoft FeedCreator</generator>
        
	
		<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>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>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> 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>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>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>
	