Thursday, January 10, 2013

B - A new family of cumulative indexes

Kozak M, Bornmann L. A new family of cumulative indexes for measuring scientific performance. PLoS ONE 2012;7(10):e47679
(doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047679)

This paper proposes a new family of cumulative indexes for measuring scientific performance which can be applied to many metrics, including h index and its variants. These indexes follow the general principle of repeating the index calculation for the same publication set. This repetition can be carried out with different data sets (scientists, journals, etc.). According to the authors, these new indexes seem not only to be effective, but they are also easy to understand and calculate.

B - Medical research outputs in 50 top countries

Jazayeri SB, Alavi A, Rahimi-Movaghar V. Situation of medical sciences in 50 top countries from 1996 to 2010-based on quality and quantity of publications. Acta Medica Iranica 2012;50(4):273-278

This study compared countries worldwide in the field of medical research from both aspects of quantity and quality of research outputs. Some modified scientometrics indices (such as citation per publication, and publication per population) were used to rank countries and to identify which of them have performed better in research outcomes by quality and quantity.

B - COPE: objectives and achievements

Wager E. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): objectives and achievements 1997-2012. La Presse Medicale 2012;41(9):861-866
(doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2012.02.049)

COPE has now over 7000 members. The article describes its history, role, growth, governance and funding, and the deveolpment of guidelines. Each member may bring anonymised cases to a quartely forum, and cases form the basis for guidance such as the flowcharts, that have been translated into several languages. COPE aims at encouraging journal editors and publishers to consider the ethical implications of their policies and practices.

B - Misconduct policies in high-impact biomedical journals

Bosch X, Hernández, Pericas JM et al. Misconduct policies in medical journals. PloS ONE 2012;7(12):e51928
(doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051928)

This study assessed the prevalence and content policies of the most influential biomedical journals on misconduct and procedures for handling and responding to allegations of misconduct. The results showed that one-third of journals provided explicit definitions of misconduct and less than half procedures for responding. There were significant differences in policies and procedures between publishers. The authors recommend that ethical guidelines should be easily accessible and address research integrity topics including misconduct policies.

B - Bibliometric analysis of scientific development in Unasur countries

Greco A, Bornmann L, Marx W. Bibliometric analysis of scientific development in countries of the Union of South American Nations (Unasur). [article in Spanish] El profesional de la información 2012;21(6):607-612
(doi: 10.3145/epi.2012.nov.07)

Using advanced bibliometric methods, this paper investigated for the first time the development of science and technology in the Unasur region in comparison to other countries worldwide in terms of bibliometric data. The publication output results revealed an increase in the scientific and technological activities in most of the Unasur countries (especially Brazil). However, compared to the rest of the world, the trend of citation impact is less favourable for all Unasur countries.

B - Inserm scientific integrity delegation

Bungener M, Hadchouel M. Role of research institutions in management of scientific fraud: the example of Inserm scientific integrity delegation. [article in French] La Presse Medicale 2012;41(9):841-846
(doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2012.02.050)

Very few French research institutions have a scientific integrity office. Scientific integrity is closely linked to the organisation, management, and evaluation of all research activities. In 1999 the French Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm) created a "Scientific Integrity delegation", and its activity is described in this article.

B - Misconduct in retracted scientific publications

Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2012;109(42):16751-16752
(doi: 10.1073/iti4212109)

A detailed review of all 2,047 biomedical and life-science research articles indexed by PubMed as retracted on May 3, 2012 revealed that only 21.3% of retractions were attributable to error. In contrast, 67.4% of retractions were attributable to misconduct, including fraud, duplicate publication and plagiarism.

B - ORCID: a system to uniquely identify researchers

Haak LL, Fenner M, Paglione L et al. ORCID: a system to uniquely identify researchers. Learned Publishing 2012;25(4):259-264
(doi: 10.1087/20120404)

ORCID (Open Researcher & Contributor ID) aims to provide a solution to the problem of author name ambiguity in scholarly communication. Benefits include reduced reporting workload, improved attribution, and a better understanding of knowledge flows. This paper details steps for publishers to integrate ORCID into manuscript submission systems, and provides recommendations for specifying and displaying ORCID metadata.