Thursday, February 28, 2008

B - Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication

Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study

Cynthia Lokker, K Ann McKibbon, R James McKinlay, Nancy L Wilczynski, R Brian Haynes

BMJ, doi:10.1136/bmj.39482.526713.BE (published 21 February 2008)

Swift identification of clinical articles that will be important to readers could expedite their dissemination through, for example, clinical guidelines and systematic reviews. This study used ratings based on data collected within 3 weeks of publication to predict citation counts at 2 years after publication
for 1261 clinical journal articles; predictions could be made with 60% surety (P<0.001).>Eleven out of 20 characteristics assessed were statistically significant. The articles rated were clinical studies and review articles with methodology that passed prespecified basic quality criteria. The authors report that the reliability of citation prediction was higher than has been found previously.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

W - A world mapper according to subject of interest

Worldmapper is a collection of world maps, where territories are re-sized on each map according to the subject of interest.
Interesting to see, among many maps, the science research maps, where publications by United States were more than three times as many as those published by the second highest-publishing population, Japan. The science growth map is also interesting for us editors, showing the growth in scientific research: if there was no increase in scientific publications that territory has no area on the map.
There are 366 maps, also available as PDF posters.

To know more, visit the site

W - "Open Access Publishing in European Networks"

The European Commission announced that the proposal from Amsterdam University Press together with five European University Presses within the/ e/Content/plus/ Programme, has been selected for negotiations on funding.
OAPEN intends to develop and implement an Open Access publication model for peer reviewed academic books in the Humanities and Social Sciences.
This will also serve as a model in other scientific domains and improve the spread of European research results.
The project aims to achieve a sustainable European approach to improve the quantity, visibility and usability of high quality academic research and foster the creation of new content by developing future-oriented publishing solutions, including an Online Library.
OAPEN addresses the needs of small to medium enterprises and not-for-profit publishers and seeks to offer solutions to both publishers and others stakeholders, such as authors, libraries, research funding bodies, and policy makers.
The project is the first of its kind and, if funded, is intended to start in September 2008.

From Press release, 12-02-2008

For more information on OAPEN please visit

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

B - Open-access publishing at what cost?

Roth, Dana L., Bronsdon, Robert, Phipps, Thomas E., Jr., and Dylla, H. Frederick. 2008 Open-access publishing at what cost?. Physics Today 61(2)8-9.

Letters commenting on Guinnessy, Paul. 2007 Stakeholders weigh costs of open-access publishing. Physics Today 60(8)29-30.
Dana L. Roth discusses the impact of page charges on the economics of open-access publication and expresses concern about the possible loss of quality that may accompany widespread open access. Open access is primarily driven by the needs of the medical community and its patients; shouldn't open access experiments be conducted and refined there first, before we attempt to impose it on all of science and technology?
Robert Bronsdon thinks the underlying problem concerns organizations formed around the intent to profit from the publication of scientific research.
Thomas E. Phipps points out that people not directly involved or institutionally affilliated are openly discriminated against by archives such as the preprint arXiv at Cornell University. For example he was charged $18 at the American Institute of Physics website to download a single page article in the American Journal of Physics.
H. Frederick Dylla, the executive director of the American Journal of Physics replies to explain the economic reasoning behind their charging system.

Posted for John Glen

Saturday, February 23, 2008

W - SCImago Journal & Country Rank , a new bibliometric indicator

SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) a new tool in the universe of bibliometric indicators

SCImago is new portal of bibliometric indicators based on citations. Launched in December 2007, it is the result of a joint project between the SCImago group, with researchers of the Universities of Granada, Extremadura, Carlos III and Alcalá from Henares, in Spain, and Elsevier Publishing Co., from the Netherlands, the owner of Scopus. Indicators are based on citations among the scientific papers indexed in Scopus from 1996 to 2007, thus ranking the performance and impact of scientific journals and countries.

Friday, February 22, 2008

B - Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors

Budden AE, Tregenza T, Aarssen LW, et al. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2008; 23:4-6.

The study reveals that the introduction in the scientific editorial world of the double-blind review process, lead to an increase of publications signed by women researchers. Within two years from the introduction of this process in the journals "Behavioral Ecology" and "Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology", has been registered a sensible increase of articles published by women researchers. The results of the study rise the question if there is a "chauvinist" bias in the peer review procedure that the double-blind process exposes, or if there is a "feminist" bias in the valutation of casual data.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

B - Developing a schema for classifying the content of editorial discussion

Dickersin K, Ssemanda E, Mansell C, Rennie D. What do the JAMA editors say when they discuss manuscripts that they are considering for publication? Developing a schema for classifying the content of editorial discussion. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2007;7:44

This study was aimed at exploring words and phrases used by a group of editors during their meetings, in an effort to identify peculiar aspects of editorial decision-making. Through an observational study of discussions at manuscripts meetings at JAMA, was developed a schema for classifying the editor's phrases, using an interactive approach. The authors concluded that the classification of editorial discourses actually provides an insight to the editorial decision-making, and for this reason needs further exploration in future studies.

B - Effects of Spacing and Titles on Judgements of the Effectiveness of Structured Abstracts

Hartley J, Betts L. The Effects of Spacing and Titles on Judgements of the effectiveness of Structured Abstracts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2007;58(14):2335-2340
doi: 10.1002/asi.20718

This research, due to the limitation of previous researches assessing the effectiveness of structured abstracs, is aimed at redressing these limitations. It presents three studies for which were prepared four versions of each of four abstracts. Results showed that the layout of the text, along with subheadings, contributed to an higher rating of effectiveness for structured abstracts, suggesting that the spacial organization, and the greater amount of information, are the main reasons why structured abstracts are generally judged to be superior to traditional ones.

B - Keeping plagiarism at bay

Martin B. R. Keeping plagiarism at bay - A salutary tale. Science Direct 2007;36(7):905-911

The main concern of this editorial is examining whether plagiarism is increasing in social sciences and, if so, what should be done to keep this problem under control. What prompted the study was the discovery of a serious case of plagiarism that posed a foundamental question as to whether plagiarism may be far more common than previously assumed. The editorial in conclusion suggests that a fair degree of vigilance and a greater willingness to pursue suspected research misconduct are required by editors, referees, publishers and the whole academic community to keep plagiarism at bay.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

B - Journal Usage factors

Peter T Shepherd PT. Final Report on the Investigation into the Feasibility of Developing and Implementing Journal Usage Factors. Sponsored by the United Kingdom Serials Group, May 2007

This report shows the growing interest in the development of usage-based alternatives to citation-based measures of journal performance (Impact factor). The objective of the study was to determine whether the Usage Factor (UF) concept is a meaningful one, whether it will be practical to implement and whether it will provide additional insights into the value and quality of online journals. The study was divided into two Phases. In Phase 1 in-depth interviews were held with 29 prominent opinion makers from the STM author/editor, librarian and journal publisher communities, not only to explore their reaction to the Usage Factor in principle, but also to discuss how it might be implemented and used. Phase 2 consisted of a web-based survey of a larger cross-section of the author and librarian communities. The Counter (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) metrics was applied to this study

Monday, February 04, 2008

b - Peer Review: benefits, perceptions and alternatives

Ware M. Peer Review: benefits, perceptions and alternatives. Publishing Research Consortium: London; 2008

The Publishing Research Consortium (PRC) is a group of associations and publishers, which
supports global research into scholarly communication in order to enable evidence-based discussion. The survery of the PRC shows the Peer review is widely supported by academics (93%); it improves the quality of published papers, yet there is a desire for imporvement; double blind review is generally preferred. Post publication review is seen as a useful supplement to formal peer review. Most reviewers are also authors (90%).