Monday, November 30, 2009

B - Global Citation Patterns of Open Access Communication Studies Journals:Pushing Beyond the Social Science Citation Index

Poor N. D. Pushing Beyond the Social Science Citation Index.
International Journal of Communication 2009; (3):853-879.
http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/568

A study carried out using the statistical technique of factor analysis, principal component analysis and clustering, that examines “2,776 citations from 305 articles …. collected from a multinational sample of 17 open access communication journals … published over three years” (articles were gathered from 2006, 2007, and 2008). The question of connectivity and citations between open access journals and mainstream open access journals as measure of “the state of health of a discipline”, lack of citation of foreign publications due to the domination of American authors and of the English language on the overall spectrum of scientific publications together with a criticisms regarding the insufficient inclusion of foreign languages works by the ISI. In addition, subject themes of publications and their relation with data skew, revealing convergence and divergence within a field through citation analysis and more specific issues are dealt with in this paper. As the author states: “If we wish to study global linkages between communication studies journals, we must push beyond the Social Science Citation Index”.

B - Uniform format for disclosure of competing interests in ICMJE journals

Uniform format for disclosure of competing interests in ICMJE journals
The Lancet; 2009 374(9699):1395-1396

doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61796

Disclosure of conflict of interest by authors of articles published in biomedical journals has become common practice. This helps the reader to understand the relationships between the authors and various commercial entities that may have an interest in the information reported in the published article. Many journals ask authors to provide a disclosure of conflict in different formats. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), therefore, as recently provided a new disclosure form that has been adopted by all journals that are members of the ICMJE. Through this editorial, also published in other journals (JAMA. BMJ, NEJM, etc), editors are encouraged to adopt this uniform reporting format, that is available in the public domain http://www.icmje.org/

Saturday, November 28, 2009

B - Should we use the mean citations per paper to summarise a journal’s impact?

Calver MC,Bradley JS. Should we use the mean citations per paper to summarise a journal’s impact or to rank journals in the same field? Scientometrics. 2009(81)3: 611-615
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-2229-y

As criticism of the Journal Impact Factor as a standard for ranking journals
increases, other measures including the mean citations per paper have been proposed
or used. Mean citations per paper can be calculated easily from data in many data bases, removing dependence from the limited list of journals covered in Thomson Reuters’ ISI Web of Science and Journal Citation Reports.The Authors of this paper, however, suggest that it has limitations given the highly skewed distributions of citations per paper in a wide range of journals.

B - How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research?

Fanelli D. How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLoS ONE. 2009; 4(5): e5738.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738

The frequency with which scientists fabricate and falsify data, or commit other forms of scientific misconduct is a matter of controversy. This systematic review considered several surveys asking scientists about misconduct; the differences in their results are largely due to differences in methods. Only by controlling for these latter can the effects of country, discipline, and other demographic characteristics be studied in detail. Conclusions point out that there are many sociological factors associated with scientific misconductthere surveys should adopt standard methodologies to be usefully compared. According to the Author, it is likely that, if on average 2% of scientists admit to have falsified research at least once and up to 34% admit other questionable research practices, the actual frequencies of misconduct could be higher than this.

Friday, November 27, 2009

B - Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires

Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, Cooper R, Felix LM, Pratap S. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. Art. No.: MR000008.

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub4.


Postal and electronic questionnaires are widely used for data collection in epidemiological studies but non-response reduces the effective sample size and can introduce bias. This systematic review investigates the ways to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires: people can be contacted before they are sent a postal questionnaire. Postal questionnaires can be sent by first class post or recorded delivery, and a stamped-return envelope can be provided. Questionnaires, letters and e-mails can be made more personal, and preferably kept short. Incentives can be offered, for example, a small amount of money with a postal questionnaire. One or more reminders can be sent with a copy of the questionnaire to people who do not reply.

B - Publishing non-research papers as a trainee

George S, Moreira K.Publishing non-research papers as a trainee: a recipe for beginners.Singapore Med J. 2009;50(8):756-8.

http://smj.sma.org.sg/5008/5008ra2.pdf

This paper provides some practical tips to trainee doctors, who are novice researchers and who have few or no published papers, on how to publish (not how to write) non-research papers. The Authors are aware that their tips may not be relevant to all trainees aspiring to publish, but hope that some of these will be useful to most trainees.Nobody (or very few) takes off on his publishing career
with a publication in the BMJ, it is advisable to start with lower IF journals,
master the art and science of writing and publishing, and then set your goals higher.

B - Prevalence of ghostwriting spurs calls for transparency

Collier R.Prevalence of ghostwriting spurs calls for transparency
Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2009;13; 181(8): E161–E162.

doi: 10.1503/cmaj.109-3036

It’s no secret that the names at the top of articles published in medical journals aren’t always a good indication of who actually wrote them. What may be surprising is how prevalent ghost-writing appears to have become. Between 50% and 100% of articles on drugs that appear in journals are said to be ghostwritten,and the effect of ghostwriting on the quality of medical publishing is difficult to assess.

B - Requirements and definitions in conflict of interest policies of medical journals.

Blum JA, Freeman K, Dart RC, Cooper RJ.Requirements and definitions in conflict of interest policies of medical journals.JAMA 2009;25;302(20):2230-4.

Conflicts of interest (COI)may influence medical literature. However, it is still unclear whether medical journals have consistent policies for defining and soliciting COI disclosures. This study aims to determine the prevalence of author COI policies, requirements for signed disclosure statements, and variability in COI definitions among medical journals. Results show that of 256 journals, 89% had author COI policies, 54% percent required authors to sign a disclosure statement, and 77% provided definitions of COI. Conclusions show that in 2008, most medical journals with relatively high impact factors had author COI policies available for public review. Among journals, there was substantial variation in policies for solicitation of author COIs and in definitions of COI.

B - The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom

Sidhu R, Rajashekhar P, Lavin VL, Parry J, Attwood J, Holdcroft A, Sanders DS.
The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom J R Soc Med. 2009,102(8):337-42

Career progression depends on measures of esteem, including publication publication in prestigious journals.A shortfall exists of female doctors in senior academic posts in the United Kingdom. This study investigates gender differences in first and senior authorship in six peer-reviewed British journals (including BMJ and Lancet) in the years for 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2004 and analyses factors that are associated with publication rates. There is an general increase in UK female first authors since 1970. In contrast, there is considerable lag and in some specialties a decline in female senior authors. Factors that could narrow the gender gap in authorship should be sought and addressed.

B - Liberating the voices of science

Carr K, Liberating the voices of science. The Australian, January 16, 2008.



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23057489-25192,00.html

The Australians' view on the role of scientists and researchers to contribute to economic, social and environmental wellbeing and to expand our horizons of knowledge. It involves controversial interpretations.
Public debate must be as well informed as possible and those who have expertise in the areas under debate must be able to contribute. According to the Author, this means that researchers working in Australian universities and public research agencies must be - and must be allowed to be - active participants in such debates, therefore, it is essential to communicate new ideas and to infuse public debate with the best research and new knowledge.

B - Scholarly communication

Morrison H. Scholarly Communication for Librarians. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Limited
2009

http://www.woodheadpublishing.com/en/book.aspx?bookID=1864&ChandosTitle=1

This book covers the current landscape of scholarly communications and publishing and potential futures, outlining key aspects of transition to best possible futures for libraries and librarians. It explains complex concepts in a clear, concise manner - designed to quickly bring the reader up to speed on scholarly communications - written by a well-known international expert on scholarly communications and open access.

Sunday, November 22, 2009

B - Open science at web-scale: Optimising participation and predictive potential

Lyon, L. Open science at web-scale: Optimising participation and predictive potential.
Open-science-report 2009;V1.0.
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/opensciencerpt.aspx

An in-depth report on Data Intensive Open science and its implications. A host of questions (aided with some pictorial examples) related to the impact, development, future and potentials of participating science on research and research practices, communities, higher education institutes and funding organizations. Raising awareness of “institutional senior management teams of the strategic implication of this potentially transformational agenda”, costs and skills required to implement it; a wide range of evaluations and questions/proposals.

B - How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 1 2 3 Easy Steps

Trebino R. How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 1 2 3 Easy Steps
Physics World 2009;22(11):56.

The history of an ultimately unsuccessful attempt by Trebino to comment on a paper which "proved" that his life's work was wrong! Caught between a limit of 1 page and reviewers' insistence on more detail, and finally the reviewers' rejection of the author's official reply. For the full (true!) story see www.physics.gatech.edu/frog.
Thanks to John Glen

Monday, November 02, 2009

B - Can the highly cited psychiatric paper be predicted early?

Hyett M, Parker G. Can the highly cited psychiatric paper be predicted early?

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psichiatry 2009;(43):173-176.

Normally, the importance of a scientific contribution is seen by citation frequency over time and time is the key factor for most of psychiatric researchers. A presentation of paper from preparation to publication is a lengthy process as well as recognition by the scientific community. Can citation perspectives of an article published after two years be predicted 3 weeks after publication (* Lokker C, McKibbon KA, McKinlay RJ, Wilczynshi NL, Haynes RB. “Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at 2 years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study” BMJ 2008;(336): 655-657) as reported in a recent study by BMJ? The authors sampled 1274 articles from 105 top medicine journals on the basis of 20 potential predictors applying a multiple regression analysis over a longer review period. The conclusions are not consistent with the BMJ report and the authors also indicate that the inclusion of lower impact journals would give a better understanding in predicting future citation success.