DOI: 10.3897/ese.2026.e183055

Authors: Mary Hannah-Griebel, Amy Minix

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.

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.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.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.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.2021.e63663

Authors: Olivier Pourret, David William Hedding, Daniel Enrique Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Haiyan Liu, Jonathan Peter Tennant

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%–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.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e61658

Authors: Randa Farah, Saif Aldeen AlRyalat, Wala'a Aburumman, Dana Sakaji, Muna Alhusban, Reem Hamasha, Majd Alkhrissat, Mohammad Qablawi, Ayat Alni’mat

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 (±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.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2021.e60203

Authors: Jaime Teixeira da Silva, Mohammadamin Erfanmanesh

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 – many Hungarian journals are indexed neither in WoS nor in Scopus – have not been scrutinized adequately through post-publication peer review.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e54523

Authors: Hilary Okagbue, Jaime Teixeira da Silva, Timothy Anake

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’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 €930. The amount of APCs was found to be correlated to IF (R² = 0.64; p <0.001; 107 journals) and also to CiteScore (R² = 0.619; p <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 <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.

HTML

XML

PDF

DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e56541

Authors: Quan-Hoang Vuong, Manh-Toan Ho

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.

HTML

XML

PDF