Friday, December 14, 2012

B - How much doctoral clinical research is published?

Caan W, Cole M. How much doctoral research on clinical topics is published? Evidence-Based Medicine 2012;17(3):71-74
(doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2011-100227)

This study aimed to determine how often clinical research from doctoral degree programmes is unpublished and what characteristics exist between those researchers who do or do not publish their work or between the institution where they studied. Results showed that research evidence associated with doctoral degrees is often left unpublished. Supporting students in publishing preliminary work while they are still in doctoral programmes may be the most productive solution.

B - Open access publishing: advantages and disadvantages

Manista FC. "Open don't mean free": a reflection on the potential advantages and disadvantages of open access publishing. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 2012;1(2):eP1049.
(doi: 10.7710/2162-3309.1049)

The evolution of open access is important, but proposed OA approaches have not yet resolved issues involving dissemination and distribution of high quality research. The Finch Report, released in the UK, is a significant attempt to ensure that research is made available openly and for the benefit of everyone, including the public and others outside of the academe. Some key issues as those related to financial aspects are not adequately addressed in the Report ("open don't mean free") and need to be considered.

Monday, December 10, 2012

B - Embargo on Iranian scientific publications

Lankarani KB, Haghdoost A, Smith P. Embargo on publication of scientific papers by Iranian authors. The Lancet 2012;380(9842)648 649
(doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61369-5)

Since the Islamic revolution in 1979 scientists from Iranian institutions have published joint papers with scientists from 107 other countries, mostly from the USA and UK, and have experienced a rapid increase in the publication of scientific papers in indexed journals. Recently few academic publishers have embargoed scientific publications from Iran, not in accordance with scientific publication ethics.

B - Publication of public health theses in Turkey

Sipahi H, Durusoy R, Ergin I, et al. Publication rates of public health theses in international and national peer-review journals in Turkey. Iranian Journal of Public Health 2012;41(9):31-35

This study investigated the publication rates of Turkish public health doctorate theses and specialization theses in international and Turkish national peer-reviewed journals, and analyzed the distribution of research areas. Being rates low, the authors suggests a better understanding of factors affecting this situation, also through a case-control study, in order to find appropriate solutions.

B - Plagiarism in scientific publishing

Masic I. Plagiarism in the scientific publishing. Acta Informatica Medica 2012;20(4):208-213
(doi: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.208-213)

The author describes his experiences in discovering plagiarism as Editor-in-Chief of three indexed medical journals. He also presents several examples of plagiarism recorded in Southeastern European countries. According to his opinion, scientific institutions and universities should have established units for monitoring,  promoting and developing quality research, in accordance with the principles of Good Scientific Practices (GSP) and Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). It is necessary to work on mechanisms for early detection of plagiarism, and relevant softwares should be used by scientific journals.

Thursday, December 06, 2012

B - Relationship between impact factor and papers' citations

Lazano GA, Larivière V, Gingras Y. The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012;63(11):2140-2145
(doi: 10.1002/asi.v63.11/issuetoc)

This study compares the strength of the relationship between journals' impact factors (IFs) and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Since scientific information began to be disseminated electronically, around 1990, the relation between IFs and paper citation rates has been weakening, and the percentage of top papers coming from the top journals has been decreasing. All this could bring forth the end of the IF as a useful measure of the quality of journals, papers, and researchers.

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

B - Authors' COI disclosure in Iranian medical journals

Heidari A, Adeli SH, Mehravaran S. et al. Addressing ethical considerations and authors' conflict of interest disclosure in medical journals in Iran. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2012;9(4):457-462
(doi: 10.1007/s11673-012-9393-8)

This study aim to examine how ethical considerations and competing interests (conflicts of interest, COI) are addressed by medical journals in Iran. Results show that the rate of addressing ethical considerations is not far from ideal, but the requirements for COI disclosure needs more attention.

B - Consequences of conflict of interest disclosure

Loewenstein G, Sah S, Cain DM. The unintended consequences of conflict of interest disclosure. JAMA 2012;307(7):669-670
(doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.154)

Conflicts of of interest, both financial and nonfinancial, are ubiquitous in medicine, and the most commonly remedy is disclosure. Disclosure acknowledges the problem of conflicts but involves minimal regulation and is less expensive to implement than more comprehensive remedies. It is broadly perceived to have beneficial effects. However, disclosure can have adverse effects, exacerbating bias and hurting those it is intended to help.

B - Selecting the right journal

Welch SJ. Selecting the right journal for your submission. Journal of Thoracic Disease 2012;4(3):336-338
(doi:  10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2012.05.06)

One of the key decisions an author must make is where to submit his paper. This article addresses several important criteria to making that decision, including identifying a list of potential journals, topic match, acceptance/rejection rate of the journal, speed of review/publication, distribution of and access to the journal, and impact factor.

B - Does endorsement of reporting guidelines infuence the completeness of reporting?

Shamseer L, Stevens A, Skidmore B. et al. Does journal endorsement of reporting guidelines influence the completeness of reporting of health research? A systematic review protocol. Systematic Reviews 2012;1(1):24
(doi:  10.1186/2046-4053-1-24)

Reporting of health research is often inadequate and incomplete. Many guidelines have been developed for reporting a variety of research types and aim at improving the quality of health research reports. In order to increase their uptake, evidence of their effectiveness is important and will provide authors, peer reviewers and editors with an important resource for use and implementation of pertinent guidance. The objective of this study was to assess whether endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals influences the completeness of reporting of health studies.

B - Avoiding plagiarism

Roig M. Avoiding unethical writing practices. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2012;50(10):3385-3387
(doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2012.06.043)

It has been noted that more articles have been published with the word "plagiarism" in their title since 2005 than were published in all of the years prior to 2004. Plagiarism manifests itself in various ways and it also includes the misappropriation of others' intellectual property, including ideas, images, and methodologies. This Editorial cites some common myths about plagiarism and describes self-plagiarism and other forms of redundancy.

Tuesday, December 04, 2012

B - Measuring the societal impact of research

Bornmann L. Measuring the societal impact of research. EMBO reports 2012;13(8):673-676
(doi: 10.1038/embor.2012.99)

While research is less and less assessed on scientific impact alone, the increasingly important contributions of science to society should be quantified. The problem begins with defining the "societal impact of research" and how to evaluate societal quality. Research into societal impact is still in the early stages: it is much harder to measure than scientific impact, and there are probably no indicators that can be used across all disciplines and institutions for collation in databases. Societal impact often takes many years to become apparent.

B - Authorship disagreements

Dance A. Who's on first? Nature 2012;489:591-593
(doi: 10.1038/nj7417-591a)

When scientists collaborate on an experiment and a paper, it can be hard to decide who gets the credit and how much. Disagreements often happen when contributors put in similar amounts of effort on different aspects of a project. Journals are increasingly attempting to keep authors in line by asking for details on who did what. Some tips for settling the line-up are provided.

B - Selection of journals by A&I services

Scott-Lichter D. New journal selection by A&Is - still valuable after all these years. Learned Publishing 2012;25:245-246
(doi: 10.1087/20120401)

Well-established and carefully crafted abstracting and indexing (A&I) services are still very important to a new journal's success. Publishers and A&Is have a synergistic relationship: publishers supply their content for indexing, while the A&Is index and distribute it. A critical part of the A&I enterprise is represented by the selection of journals for indexing. As with journals, A&Is have different offerings, strenghts and weaknesses. Starting from the author's experience in getting a recently launched journal into A&I databases, some of them (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science) are described in this Editorial.;jsessionid=2nv3tups9pag0.alice