-
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research Dec 2020As 2020 comes to a close, the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research (IJHPR) will soon be starting its tenth year of publication. This editorial compares data from...
As 2020 comes to a close, the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research (IJHPR) will soon be starting its tenth year of publication. This editorial compares data from 2012 (the journal's first year of publication) and 2019 (the journal's most recent full year of publication), regarding the journal's mix of article types, topics, data sources and methods, with further drill-downs regarding 2019.The analysis revealed several encouraging findings, including a broad and changing mix of topics covered. However, the analysis also revealed several findings that are less encouraging, including the limited number of articles which assessed national policy changes, examined changes over time, and/or made secondary use of large-scale survey data. These findings apparently reflect, to some extent, the mix of studies being carried out by Israeli health services researchers.As the senior editors of the IJHPR we are interested in working with funders, academic institutions, the owners and principal users of relevant administrative databases, and individual scholars to further understand the factors influencing the mix of research being carried out, and subsequently published, by Israel's health services research community. This deeper understanding could then be used to develop a joint plan to diversify and enrich health services research and health policy analysis in Israel. The plan should include a policy of ensuring improved access to data, to properly support information-based research.
Topics: Health Policy; Humans; Israel; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing
PubMed: 33272324
DOI: 10.1186/s13584-020-00427-9 -
Indian Journal of Pathology &... 2020
Topics: Humans; Manuscripts as Topic; Publishing
PubMed: 32031114
DOI: 10.4103/0377-4929.277433 -
The Journal of the Royal College of... Dec 2023
Topics: Humans; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing; Peer Review, Research
PubMed: 37997747
DOI: 10.1177/14782715231215525 -
Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and... 2022Publication and dissemination of peer-reviewed articles are essential for delivering up-to-date high-quality care to diverse populations. Online attention and...
BACKGROUND
Publication and dissemination of peer-reviewed articles are essential for delivering up-to-date high-quality care to diverse populations. Online attention and publication trends for skin of color (SOC) articles have not been studied.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate SOC article online attention and publication trends.
METHODS
Terms "skin of colo(u)r", "ethnic skin", "dark skin", and "darker skin" were searched on Altmetric. Abstracts were reviewed to exclude non-SOC articles. Altmetric attention score (AAS), media outlets, citations, page views, and journal impact factor were extracted.
RESULTS
A total of 425 articles, published in 114 journals, were included, with average AAS 13 (0-423), citations 42 (0-1214) and page views 2728 (7-15000). There was a 7.8-fold increase in the number of SOC articles published in the first-half (1993-2006) vs. second-half (2007-2021) of the study period. The number of SOC articles increased by 57%, 2011-2015 to 2016-2020. AAS was significantly correlated with citations ( = .21), page views ( = .23) and impact factor ( = .35) ( < .05 for all). The top 50 AAS articles had an average AAS 83 (21-423), with 35 (70%) published in the last 5 years (2016-2021) and 47 (94%) published in the second-half of the study period. Top four AAS articles focused on SOC representation in educational resources.
CONCLUSION
It is promising that increased numbers of SOC articles have been published in recent years and are garnering more attention, however they are less popular than other dermatology articles. Increased efforts are needed to study and publish on skin diseases in diverse populations to build knowledge and practices that improve patient care.
Topics: Humans; Bibliometrics; Dermatology; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing; Ethnic and Racial Minorities
PubMed: 34543140
DOI: 10.1177/12034754211045387 -
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Aug 2022To identify the 10 most numerically prolific authors publishing in the field of orthodontics for each year over the last decade (2011-2020), describe the characteristics...
OBJECTIVES
To identify the 10 most numerically prolific authors publishing in the field of orthodontics for each year over the last decade (2011-2020), describe the characteristics of these outputs and identify trends in the types of study being published.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A Scopus literature search was conducted to identify the 10 most numerically prolific publishing authors in orthodontics for each year during this decade. Number and characteristics of all publications for each author were analysed with descriptive and inferential statistics.
RESULTS
Forty-nine different individual authors were identified who were collectively prolific for between 1-8 years within the assessment decade. These authors published a total of 2025 papers, with a median annual output of 18 papers per year; however, half of these authors published between 15-24 papers per year (range 5-200). Amongst authors, 2 or more collaborated on only 7% of the identified papers. The median number of authors per paper was 5 (range 1-27) with significant variation according to study design (P < .001). The majority of authors originated from Brazil (19.3%), Italy (14.1%) and India (12.7%). Most papers described non-prospective clinical studies (38.1%), case reports or case series (11.1%) and narrative reviews (10.8%). Finally, prolific authors had a smaller annual output when publishing in orthodontic journals (P < .001) and when publishing experimental primary research (P = .04).
CONCLUSIONS
A cohort of prolific authors in orthodontics between 2011-2020 was identified. Extreme variation was found in annual output between these authors but case reports, non-prospective clinical studies and narrative reviews predominated.
Topics: Authorship; Bibliometrics; Humans; Orthodontics; Publications; Publishing
PubMed: 34839575
DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12551 -
PLoS Biology Feb 2022Preprints allow researchers to make their findings available to the scientific community before they have undergone peer review. Studies on preprints within bioRxiv have...
Preprints allow researchers to make their findings available to the scientific community before they have undergone peer review. Studies on preprints within bioRxiv have been largely focused on article metadata and how often these preprints are downloaded, cited, published, and discussed online. A missing element that has yet to be examined is the language contained within the bioRxiv preprint repository. We sought to compare and contrast linguistic features within bioRxiv preprints to published biomedical text as a whole as this is an excellent opportunity to examine how peer review changes these documents. The most prevalent features that changed appear to be associated with typesetting and mentions of supporting information sections or additional files. In addition to text comparison, we created document embeddings derived from a preprint-trained word2vec model. We found that these embeddings are able to parse out different scientific approaches and concepts, link unannotated preprint-peer-reviewed article pairs, and identify journals that publish linguistically similar papers to a given preprint. We also used these embeddings to examine factors associated with the time elapsed between the posting of a first preprint and the appearance of a peer-reviewed publication. We found that preprints with more versions posted and more textual changes took longer to publish. Lastly, we constructed a web application (https://greenelab.github.io/preprint-similarity-search/) that allows users to identify which journals and articles that are most linguistically similar to a bioRxiv or medRxiv preprint as well as observe where the preprint would be positioned within a published article landscape.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Language; Peer Review, Research; Preprints as Topic; Publications; Terminology as Topic
PubMed: 35104289
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001470 -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Jul 2020In the UK the BAPRAS (British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons) meetings have always represented the ideal platform for disseminating new...
In the UK the BAPRAS (British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons) meetings have always represented the ideal platform for disseminating new information in the field of plastic surgery. Previous studies have suggested the publication rate for these meetings has been falling. Our aim was to re-assess the conversion rates of presented abstracts to publications. All abstracts from BAPRAS meetings between Winter 2014 and Summer 2016 were included. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were used to search for full publications. A database was collated, this included; time to publication, journal of publication and impact factor of journal. A total of 500 abstracts were presented during the study period for which the publication rate was 28.4%. The average time to publication was 16.8 months. The most common publication journal was the Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (JPRAS) (34%). Free papers were published in journals with significantly greater impact factors (p = 0.046). Publication rates were similar to previous literature for BAPRAS meetings and have increased since 2007. A continued downward trend of publication rates for BAPRAS meetings is not seen in our data. A reduction in the number of publications in JPRAS may be explained by a rise in the impact factor of the journal or increasing competitiveness for publications. When variations in methodology are accounted for publication rates are similar to other specialties. In order to continually assess the quality of papers presented at BAPRAS meetings, the conversion to publication should be regularly re-audited.
Topics: Bibliometrics; Publishing; Societies, Medical; Surgery, Plastic; United Kingdom
PubMed: 32241743
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.02.046 -
Asian Journal of Psychiatry Aug 2019
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Biomedical Research; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Editorial Policies; Humans; Machine Learning; Psychiatry; Publications; Publishing
PubMed: 31530438
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2019.09.009 -
The Medical Journal of Australia Aug 2019
Topics: Australia; Humans; Journal Impact Factor; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing
PubMed: 31304597
DOI: 10.5694/mja2.50273 -
Ophthalmic Epidemiology Aug 2022There are currently no available aids for authors when selecting ophthalmology journals to submit their manuscripts. We aim to provide comprehensive data on the duration...
PURPOSE
There are currently no available aids for authors when selecting ophthalmology journals to submit their manuscripts. We aim to provide comprehensive data on the duration from submission to various stages of the publication process and assess factors influencing time to publication in ophthalmology journals.
METHODS
A list of ophthalmology journals was obtained from the 2019 Web of Science Journal Citation Report. Journal characteristics, such as five-year impact factor, number of authors per article, journal type, and number of multi-institutional articles, were collected. The dates of submission, acceptance, electronic and print publication for all articles published in an ophthalmology journal in 2019 were determined.
RESULTS
In total, 56 journals and 8835 research articles were included. Of these articles, 3591 (40.6%) were open access and 4837 (54.7%) were multi-institutional. In 2019, most publications came from the United States of America (n = 1973), China (n = 1069) and Germany (n = 602). Significant associations were found between various predictors and a reduced mean number of days from submission to electronic publication: increased journal five-year impact factor (.026), more authors (.028), publishing in a hybrid journal (both open-access and subscription articles) versus an open-access journal (.021), and a reduced proportion of multi-institutional articles in a journal (.030).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a wide variation in the time to acceptance and publication in ophthalmology journals. Authors can expect a shorter time to publication when publishing in high-impact journals.
Topics: Bibliometrics; Germany; Humans; Ophthalmology; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing; United States
PubMed: 34027811
DOI: 10.1080/09286586.2021.1926516