-
EMBO Reports Oct 2023A fundamental tenet of the scientific process is that science is self-correcting. Efficient correction of the scientific literature requires a more nuanced set of...
A fundamental tenet of the scientific process is that science is self-correcting. Efficient correction of the scientific literature requires a more nuanced set of policies and tools that lower the bar to author self-correction. The community has to embrace correction as a signal of scholarly quality.
Topics: Publications
PubMed: 37733215
DOI: 10.15252/embr.202358155 -
Ugeskrift For Laeger Dec 2023Introduction Christmas-themed scientific articles are becoming increasingly popular and may represent a shortcut to scientific demise due to their demand for time better...
Introduction Christmas-themed scientific articles are becoming increasingly popular and may represent a shortcut to scientific demise due to their demand for time better spent on "serious" research. We aimed to investigate whether authorship on Christmas-themed medical articles could damage the scientific careers of authors. We hypothesized that Christmas-authorships had a negative impact on core bibliometric outcomes such as publication rates. Methods We extracted demographic and bibliometric data on first- and last authors of medical papers written for the Christmas edition of Journal of The Danish Medical Association through the years 2010-2012. These cases were compared with controls representing authors of original "serious" research papers written in the same years. We performed a negative binomial regression with the number of publications ten years after the index date (defined as the publication year of Christmas/"serious" article) as the outcome and adjusted models for sex and age. Results We found that first authors of Christmas-themed papers had a publication rate ratio (PRR) of 3.8 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4-12.4) in unadjusted analysis and last authors had a PRR of 0.6 (95% CI: 0.2-1.6). The associations weakened and were statistically insignificant in adjusted analyses. Conclusion Our results indicate that first authors publish more in the years following the publication of a Christmas article, although the association may be entirely driven by sex and age. Causality remains uncertain and further studies (such as RCTs) which randomize authors to produce Christmas-themed (preferably in a Santa's workshop setting) or serious articles are needed. Funding. None. Trial registration. None.
Topics: Humans; Case-Control Studies; Bibliometrics; Authorship
PubMed: 38084624
DOI: No ID Found -
Proceedings of the National Academy of... Apr 2024
Topics: Humans; Publishing; Surveys and Questionnaires; Research
PubMed: 38657040
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2406826121 -
Transplant International : Official... 2024
Topics: Humans; Kidney; Kidney Transplantation; Publishing
PubMed: 38389709
DOI: 10.3389/ti.2024.12711 -
Journal of Korean Medical Science Nov 2023Plagiarism is among the prevalent misconducts reported in scientific writing and common causes of article retraction in scholarly journals. Plagiarism of idea is not... (Review)
Review
Plagiarism is among the prevalent misconducts reported in scientific writing and common causes of article retraction in scholarly journals. Plagiarism of idea is not acceptable by any means. However, plagiarism of text is a matter of debate from culture to culture. Herein, I wish to reflect on a bird's eye view of plagiarism, particularly plagiarism of text, in scientific writing. Text similarity score as a signal of text plagiarism is not an appropriate index and an expert should examine the similarity with enough scrutiny. Text recycling in certain instances might be acceptable in scientific writing provided that the authors could correctly construe the text piece they borrowed. With introduction of artificial intelligence-based units, which help authors to write their manuscripts, the incidence of text plagiarism might increase. However, after a while, when a universal artificial unit takes over, no one will need to worry about text plagiarism as the incentive to commit plagiarism will be abolished, I believe.
Topics: Humans; Plagiarism; Publishing; Artificial Intelligence; Writing; Scientific Misconduct
PubMed: 37987104
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e373 -
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Aug 2023
Topics: Humans; Publishing
PubMed: 37530255
DOI: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_1901_23 -
Anais Da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias Oct 2023
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Publications; Bibliometrics
PubMed: 37851718
DOI: 10.1590/0001-37652023202395S1 -
Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons... Nov 2023
Topics: Open Access Publishing
PubMed: 37906975
DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0087 -
Medical Sciences (Basel, Switzerland) Sep 2023The rapid emergence of publicly accessible artificial intelligence platforms such as large language models (LLMs) has led to an equally rapid increase in articles... (Review)
Review
The rapid emergence of publicly accessible artificial intelligence platforms such as large language models (LLMs) has led to an equally rapid increase in articles exploring their potential benefits and risks. We performed a bibliometric analysis of ChatGPT literature in medicine and science to better understand publication trends and knowledge gaps. Following title, abstract, and keyword searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for ChatGPT articles published in the medical field, articles were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included articles, with citation counts obtained from PubMed and journal metrics obtained from Clarivate Journal Citation Reports. After screening, 267 articles were included in the study, most of which were editorials or correspondence with an average of 7.5 +/- 18.4 citations per publication. Published articles on ChatGPT were authored largely in the United States, India, and China. The topics discussed included use and accuracy of ChatGPT in research, medical education, and patient counseling. Among non-surgical specialties, radiology published the most ChatGPT-related articles, while plastic surgery published the most articles among surgical specialties. The average citation number among the top 20 most-cited articles was 60.1 +/- 35.3. Among journals with the most ChatGPT-related publications, there were on average 10 +/- 3.7 publications. Our results suggest that managing the inevitable ethical and safety issues that arise with the implementation of LLMs will require further research exploring the capabilities and accuracy of ChatGPT, to generate policies guiding the adoption of artificial intelligence in medicine and science.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Bibliometrics; Biomedical Research; Benchmarking; Radiology
PubMed: 37755165
DOI: 10.3390/medsci11030061 -
JAMA Ophthalmology Jul 2023The primary vehicle for reporting and testing advances in eye care is refereed ophthalmic journals, which can be characterized using targeted bibliometric analyses.
IMPORTANCE
The primary vehicle for reporting and testing advances in eye care is refereed ophthalmic journals, which can be characterized using targeted bibliometric analyses.
OBJECTIVE
To identify all ophthalmic journals and evaluate citation metrics relating to articles, journals, authors, institutions, and countries published therein.
DESIGN AND SETTING
A bibliometric analysis was undertaken of all ophthalmic journals included in the Scopus database (Elsevier). The search was restricted to all article types published in ophthalmic journals in English from inception through November 18, 2022. After excluding general medical journals, journals published in a language other than English, and spurious titles unrelated to the ophthalmic field, the Scopus database was found to list 335 ophthalmic journal titles that have published 471 184 articles, constituting the data set for this analysis. The 20 most highly cited articles were identified. Rank-order lists by article count were assembled for journals, authors, institutions, and countries.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
An h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was derived from citations and article counts for each constituent of each category.
RESULTS
The h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was determined to be 494. The journal with the highest h-index was Ophthalmology (h-index, 297). The journal with the greatest number of articles was American Journal of Ophthalmology (38 441 articles). The most highly cited article was by Quigley and Broman, 2006 (5147 citations), concerning the epidemiology of glaucoma. The author with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles was Ronald Klein, MD (h-index, 126), and the most prolific was Carol L. Shields, MD (1400 articles). Johns Hopkins University (h-index, 215) was the institution with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles, and Harvard University was the most prolific (10 071 articles). The United States was the nation with the highest h-index for ophthalmic journal articles (h-index, 444) and was the most prolific (180 017 articles).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this study, the most highly cited articles published in ophthalmic journals were revealed, as well as the leading journals, authors, institutions, and countries. While excluding ophthalmology articles in general medical journals, this investigation affords a means of identifying highly cited authors, institutions, and countries which individuals or institutions can use as a guide regarding contributions to the field.
Topics: Humans; United States; Periodicals as Topic; Bibliometrics; Publications; Ophthalmology
PubMed: 37261835
DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2023.2062