Article processing charge may be a barrier to publishing

Research Output inOrthopaedics and Sports Medicine from Nigeria and Africa - A Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Nigeria has a relatively large scientific community that produces an adequate research output among African countries. Not many studies have analysed the research output in orthopaedics and sports medicine from Nigeria and Africa. Hence, we aimed to analyze the research output in orthopaedics and sports medicine from Nigeria and Africa.

Methodology

We used the SCOPUS data from the Scimago Journal & Country Rank website. It allows us to draw various journal metrics for research.

Results

Between 1996 and 2022, Nigerian research publications in orthopaedics and sports medicine had grown from 4 in 1996 to 39 in 2022 (a 10-fold growth) but overall is 62nd in the world representing 0.07% of publications in the period. In the same period, Africa published 8297 papers in orthopaedics and sports medicine representing only 1.24% of the global publications in this field.

Conclusion

There is low research output in Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine from Nigeria and, the whole African continent. However, there has been a growth in the publications from Africa.

Peer-reviewed publications in orthopaedic surgery from lower income countries: A comparative analysis

INTRODUCTION

Musculoskeletal (MSK) disease is a substantial global burden, especially in lower income countries. However, limited research has been published on MSK health by scholars from these countries. We aimed to study the distribution of authorships, including trends in peer-reviewed orthopaedic publications based on each author's affiliated institution's country income status.

METHODS

Based on a bibliometric search, 119 orthopaedic-related journals were identified using the Journal Citation Reports database. Details of all scientific articles published in these journals between 2012 and 2021 were used to study trends and association between each of the author's affiliated institution's country income status, using the World Bank Classification.

RESULTS

Of the 133,718 unique articles, 87.6% had at least one author affiliation from a high-income country (HIC), 7.0% from an upper-middle income country (UMIC), 5.2% from a lower-middle income country (LMIC), and 0.2% from a low-income country (LIC). Overall, these articles were cited 1,825,365 times, with 92.5% of citations from HIC-affiliated authors and < 0.1% from LIC-affiliated authors. Over the 10-year study period, HIC-affiliated articles demonstrated the largest increase in the number of publications (9107-14,619), compared to UMIC-affiliated (495-1214), LMIC-affiliated (406-874), and LIC-affiliated articles (4-28).

CONCLUSIONS

There are large and persistent disparities in orthopaedic research publications based on the country income status of the author's affiliated institution, especially in the higher impact orthopaedic journals. Efforts should be made to increase opportunities for scholars from LICs and LMICs to publish their research in high-impact orthopaedic journals.

Access to evidence-based care: a systematic review of trauma and surgical literature costs across resource settings

Background

Evidence-based medicine has become the foundation for surgeons around the world to provide the most effective surgical care. However, the article processing charges (APCs) and subscription fees for surgical journals may be a barrier, particularly for those in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Objectives

The objective of this study was to define the current options for producers and consumers of surgical literature, inclusive of trauma, across resource settings.

Data sources

The Web of Science Core Collection database.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

A complete list of journals publishing surgical content between 2019 and 2020 was compiled. The most frequently indexed journals were reviewed using the individual journal websites to extract the type of access (ie, open, closed, hybrid), impact factors, publication languages, APCs, subscription pricing, and any discounts listed.

Results

The literature search revealed 4759 unique journals. The 500 most frequently indexed were reviewed. The mean APC for a fully open access surgical journal was US$1574 and for a hybrid surgical journal was US$3338. The average costs for a 1-year subscription in a hybrid surgical journal were US$434 and US$1878 for an individual and institution, respectively. When considering purchasing power parity, APCs and subscription costs ranged from 2 to 15 times more expensive in LMICs when compared with those in the USA.

Limitations

Primary search term was in English only, and only peer-reviewed journal articles were reviewed.

Conclusions or implications of key findings

Although initiatives exist to support peer-reviewed journals in LMICs, there is an exorbitant cost for authors in these countries, as well as those in high-income countries that are not affiliated with a large institution, to either publish in, or access, a majority of surgical journals. Efforts to lower the overall cost of publishing must be made to provide greater access to medical literature.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD4202140227.

Level of evidence

Level IV.

Cost of open access publishing in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery

Objective

Open access (OA) publishing makes research more accessible but is associated with steep article processing charges (APCs). The study objective was to characterize the APCs of OA publishing in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) journals.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of published policies of 110 OHNS journals collated from three databases. The primary outcomes were the publishing model, APC for original research, and APC waiver policy.

Results

We identified 110 OHNS journals (57 fully OA, 47 hybrid, 2 subscription-only, 4 unknown model). After excluding 12 journals (2 subscription-only, 4 unknown model, 5 OA with unspecified APCs, and 1 OA that accepts publications only from society members), we analyzed 98 journals, 23 of which did not charge APCs. Among 75 journals with nonzero APCs, the mean and median APCs were $2452 and $2900 (interquartile range: $1082-3520). Twenty-five journals (33.3%) offered APC subsidies for authors in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and/or on a case-by-case basis. Eighty-five and 25 journals were based in high-income countries (HICs) and LMICs, respectively. The mean APC was higher among HIC journals than LMIC journals ($2606 vs. $958, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

APCs range from tens to thousands of dollars with limited waivers for authors in LMICs.

Educational approaches to teach students to address colonialism in global health: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The enduring legacy of colonisation on global health education, research and practice is receiving increased attention and has led to calls for the 'decolonisation of global health'. There is little evidence on effective educational approaches to teach students to critically examine and dismantle structures that perpetuate colonial legacies and neocolonialist control that influence in global health.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the published literature to provide a synthesis of guidelines for, and evaluations of educational approaches focused on anticolonial education in global health. We searched five databases using terms generated to capture three concepts, 'global health', 'education' and 'colonialism'. Pairs of study team members conducted each step of the review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyse guidelines; any conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

This search retrieved 1153 unique references; 28 articles were included in the final analysis. The articles centred North American students; their training, their evaluations of educational experiences, their individual awareness and their experiential learning. Few references discussed pedagogical approaches or education theory in guidelines and descriptions of educational approaches. There was limited emphasis on alternative ways of knowing, prioritisation of partners' experiences, and affecting systemic change.

CONCLUSION

Explicit incorporation of anticolonial curricula in global health education, informed by antioppressive pedagogy and meaningful collaboration with Indigenous and low-income and middle-income country partners, is needed in both classroom and global health learning experiences.

Promoting diversity and overcoming publication barriers in Latin American neuroscience and Alzheimer's disease research: A call to action

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a global health issue. Because AD is a condition demanding effective management, its socioeconomic burden is immense and threatens the health systems of both low- and middle-income (LMIC) and high-income (HIC) countries. However, while most of the HICs are increasing their budget for AD research, the situation is different in LMICs, and resources are scarce. In addition, LMIC researchers face significant barriers to publishing in international peer reviewed journals, including funding constraints; language barriers; and in many cases, high article processing charges. In this perspective, we discuss these disparities and propose some actions that could help promote diversity, and ultimately translate into improved AD research capacity in LMICs, especially in Latin American and Caribbean countries.

HIGHLIGHTS

Researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) face increasing difficulties such as financial constraints, language barriers, and article processing charges.Publication fees, in particular, can be a significant barrier in the process of publication and equal access to scientific information.Publication fee equalization initiatives by publishing companies could reduce the scientific inequality that disadvantages researchers in LMICs.

Awareness, use and attitudes of the Indian higher educational institutions students about scholarly open access: an empirical analysis

Purpose

Open access is a new scholarly publishing model that has appeared in place of the commercial publishing model. The aim of this study was to investigate the level of awareness, use and attitudes of the Indian students in higher educational institutions about scholarly open access.

Design/methodology/approach

Survey method was used in the study. The sample population of the study was 212 Indian students belonging to different higher educational institutions in India.

Findings

The results of the study reveal a gloomy picture about the open access (OA) awareness and use among Indian students. Unfamiliarity with the OA journals and high publication fee were the main obstacles for the students not to publish in OA journals. However, a majority of the students reported their willingness to publish in OA journals in future if the obstacles are removed. A very meager ratio of the respondents had published in OA journals so far. In addition, motivational factors for publishing in OA journals were also taken into consideration, and respondent's indicated winning research grants, great impact and higher citations as main factors to publish in OA journals.

Research limitations/implications

This study is geographically limited to the students of the higher educational institutions located in India.

Practical implications

This study will help to understand the involvement and behavior of the Indian students toward scholarly open access. The study will also guide what measures need to be taken in the take up of open access movement.

Originality/value

Institutional repositories appeared to be relatively a novel term for the respondents, and in order to get the citation advantages and higher visibility, librarians can make an effort to persuade students to publish their research work in open access journals and institutional/subject repositories. The study recommends that institutions need to take appropriate measures to inform students about the importance and overall benefits associated with using of OA platforms in their scholarly work.

Higher Author Fees in Gastroenterology Journals Are Not Associated with Faster Processing Times or Higher Impact

BACKGROUND

Publications are an important component of academic careers.

AIMS

We investigated the financial costs to authors for submitting and publishing manuscripts in gastroenterology (GI) journals in the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and elsewhere.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study carried out from 11/1/2020 to 12/31/2020. We used the SCImago Journal and Country Rankings site to compile a list of gastroenterology and hepatology journals to analyze. We gathered information on the journals' Hirsch indices (h indices), SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), Impact Factor (IF), and base countries as of 2019, processing and publication fees, open access fees, time to first decision, and time from acceptance to publication. We used t-testing and linear regression modeling to evaluate the effect of geography and journal quality metrics on processing fees and times.

RESULTS

We analyzed 97 GI journals, of which 51/97 (52.6%) were based in the US/UK while the other 46/97 (47.4%) were based elsewhere. The mean IF (5.67 vs 3.53, p = 0.08), h index (90.5 vs 41.8, p < 0.001), and SJR (1.82 vs 0.83, p < 0.001) for the US/UK journals were higher than those for non-US/UK journals. We also found that 11/51 (21.6%) of US/UK journals and 15/46 (32.6%) of non-US/UK journals had mandatory processing and publication fees. These tended to be significantly larger in the US/UK group than in the non-US/UK group (USD 2380 vs USD 1470, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Publication-related fees may preclude authors from smaller or socioeconomically disadvantaged institutions and countries from publishing and disseminating their work.

Gender equity in health research publishing in Africa

INTRODUCTION

Women researchers find it more difficult to publish in academic journals than men, an inequity that affects women's careers and was exacerbated during the pandemic, particularly for women in low-income and middle-income countries. We measured publishing by sub-Saharan African (SSA) women in prestigious authorship positions (first or last author, or single author) during the time frame 2014-2016. We also examined policies and practices at journals publishing high rates of women scientists from sub-Saharan Africa, to identify potential structural enablers affecting these women in publishing.

METHODS

The study used Namsor V.2, an application programming interface, to conduct a secondary analysis of a bibliometric database. We also analysed policies and practices of ten journals with the highest number of SSA women publishing in first authorship positions.

RESULTS

Based on regional analyses, the greatest magnitude of authorship inequity is in papers from sub-Saharan Africa, where men comprised 61% of first authors, 65% of last authors and 66% of single authors. Women from South Africa and Nigeria had greater success in publishing than those from other SSA countries, though women represented at least 20% of last authors in 25 SSA countries. The journals that published the most SSA women as prominent authors are journals based in SSA. Journals with overwhelmingly male leadership are also among those publishing the highest number of SSA women.

CONCLUSION

Women scholars in SSA face substantial gender inequities in publishing in prestigious authorship positions in academic journals, though there is a cadre of women research leaders across the region. Journals in SSA are important for local women scholars and the inequities SSA women researchers face are not necessarily attributable to gender discrepancy in journals' editorial leadership.

The research output of rod-cone dystrophy genetics

Non-syndromic rod-cone dystrophy (RCD) is the most common condition in inherited retinal diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the research output and productivity related to RCD genetics per countries as classified by the human development index (HDI), by analyzing publication frequency and citations, the choice of journals and publishers, since 2000 to date. We have also analyzed the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in publications originating from countries with different HDIs. One thousand four hundred articles focusing on non-syndromic RCD were downloaded and analyzed. Citations and published articles were adjusted per one million individuals. The research output is significantly higher in very high HDI countries (86% of the total publications and 95% of the citations) than countries with lower HDIs in all aspects. High and medium HDI countries published together 13.6% of the total articles worldwide and received 4.6% of the citations. On the publication level, the USA (26%), United Kingdom (10%), and Japan (7%) were the top 3 among very high HDI countries, while China (6%) and India (2%) ranked first in high and medium HDI countries respectively. On the citation level, similar profiles were found. Following adjustment for population size, Switzerland (~14%), Jordan (~ 1%) and Morocco (<0.2%) showed the highest rates of publications in very high, high and medium HDI countries respectively. Very high HDI countries published 71% of their papers in first quartile journals (first quartile in Scimago journal rank; Q1), and 23% in Q2 journals. High and medium HDI countries showed a similar profile in quartiles with ~ 40% of their papers published in Q1 journals and ~ 30% in Q2 journals. The first publication using NGS was issued in 2009 in very high HDI countries, while it appeared in 2012 in high HDI countries, and in 2017 in medium HDI countries, with a respective lag of 3 to 8 years compared to very high HDI countries. A profound gap exists between very high HDI countries and the rest of the world. To fill it in, we propose implementing NGS, supporting international collaborations, building capacities and infrastructures, improving accessibility of patients to services, and increasing national and international funding.

V, Pineda EU, Shukla R, da Silva RC, Yusuf AO. Barriers to scholarly publishing among library and information science researchers: International perspectives

The 21 authors of this study, 19 of whom are non-native English speakers, reflect on the barriers to publishing academic journal articles in top international journals. Each author responded to the same set of questions pertaining to educational (PhD) opportunities for emerging scholars, financial conditions for researchers, and challenges in publishing their work. Limited English language skills, lack of research funding, and different research topics were identified as the most significant barriers to publish in the journals. Recruiting volunteers or using electronic translations for accepted articles for journals, reducing software and subscription to academic journals costs, expanding journal scope, and providing guidance and collaboration across borders are possible measures to reduce the negative impact of the barriers.

Predatory journals - Alarming danger to the society

Research and publications have taken the driver's seat in the last decade, especially amongst the Orthopaedic surgeons of India (Vaishya and Lal, 2016 Oct-Dec)¹. Doing research and publishing scientific papers is crucial to practice evidence-based medicine and keep updated on the latest developments. It is also a quick method to get recognized in your field by your peers and colleagues. Sometimes, publishing literature is vital to gain positions in the profession and achieve promotions (Patralekh et al., 2021)². As a result, there is a sudden upsurge in printed literature that is inaccurate or up to the mark. It has become tough to believe the conclusions provided and alter one's clinical practice based on these facts. Hence, before reading a paper, one must learn to assess the journal's quality and its publications. In recent times, there is an upsurge in the number of predatory journals causing harm to the entire research world.