Is academic research and publishing still leaving developing countries behind?

Twelve tips for strengthening global equity in health professions education publication

Despite recent calls to engage in scholarship with attention to anti-racism, equity, and social justice at a global level in Health Professions Education (HPE), the field has made few significant advances in incorporating the views of the so-called "Other" in understanding the nature, origin, and scope of knowledge as well as the epistemic justification of knowledge production. Editors, authors, and reviewers must take responsibility for questioning existing systems and structures, specifically about how they diffuse the knowledge of a few and silence the knowledge of many. This article presents 12 recommendations proposed by The Global South Counterspace Authors Collective (GSCAC), a group of HPE professionals, representing countries in the Global South, to help the Global North enact practical changes to become more inclusive and engage in authentic and representative work in HPE publishing. This list is not all-encompassing but a first step to begin rectifying non-inclusive structures in our field.

PreprintMatch: A tool for preprint to publication detection shows global inequities in scientific publication

Preprints, versions of scientific manuscripts that precede peer review, are growing in popularity. They offer an opportunity to democratize and accelerate research, as they have no publication costs or a lengthy peer review process. Preprints are often later published in peer-reviewed venues, but these publications and the original preprints are frequently not linked in any way. To this end, we developed a tool, PreprintMatch, to find matches between preprints and their corresponding published papers, if they exist. This tool outperforms existing techniques to match preprints and papers, both on matching performance and speed. PreprintMatch was applied to search for matches between preprints (from bioRxiv and medRxiv), and PubMed. The preliminary nature of preprints offers a unique perspective into scientific projects at a relatively early stage, and with better matching between preprint and paper, we explored questions related to research inequity. We found that preprints from low income countries are published as peer-reviewed papers at a lower rate than high income countries (39.6% and 61.1%, respectively), and our data is consistent with previous work that cite a lack of resources, lack of stability, and policy choices to explain this discrepancy. Preprints from low income countries were also found to be published quicker (178 vs 203 days) and with less title, abstract, and author similarity to the published version compared to high income countries. Low income countries add more authors from the preprint to the published version than high income countries (0.42 authors vs 0.32, respectively), a practice that is significantly more frequent in China compared to similar countries. Finally, we find that some publishers publish work with authors from lower income countries more frequently than others.

Language of citation and publishing performance of graduate students in French-speaking countries with different economic and linguistic advantages

The performance of graduate students in research varies greatly across countries due to various factors, mainly socioeconomic and linguistic. The current situation is critical because the wealthiest countries are also the most linguistically equipped to navigate the English-dominant landscape of academia. Here, we assess the language of citations and the publishing performance of graduate students from three French-speaking countries: Algeria, Canada, and France, where Algeria is the least English proficient and the most economically disadvantaged. We found that the bibliography of PhD theses were English dominated in all regions (72.5% in Algeria compared with >93.1% in Western countries), whereas those of Masters theses were French dominated in Algeria (63.3%), relatively bilingual in France (47.6% French), but English dominated in Canada-Québec (94.7%) and Canada-BC (98.7%). Algerian PhD students produced fewer papers, were less likely to publish in journals with calculated impact factors, and received fewer citations than students who graduated from universities in France or in two Canadian provinces, British Columbia and Québec. Our results suggest that the economic and linguistic disadvantages faced by graduate students from non-Western backgrounds affect their academic performance, highlighting important issues in facing future global challenges.

Journal selection behavior among early-career academicians in Iran: how they choose the most appropriate journal for their publications

Purpose

Journals are the essential tools of researchers, especially academicians, to present their scientific findings. So, choosing the right journal helps not only science development but also their academic promotion. The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that Iranian medical researchers consider when selecting scholarly journals in which to submit their work.

Design/methodology/approach

A self-administered online questionnaire was emailed in May 2021, with 101 responses received. The sample included all the faculty members with the role of “lecturer” in Iranian medical universities and who have 1–5 articles in the Scopus database as early-career Iranian medical researchers. The questionnaire consisted of 36 items, divided into five sections: basic information, attitudes and beliefs, ways to choose a journal, problems and familiarity with the components of scientometrics/validity metrics related to journals.

Findings

The findings indicate that these researchers value the expertise of experienced researchers and professionals, like librarians, when selecting publication venues. They often use journal indexes to guide journal selection. They also consider factors like the length of typical peer review and the complexity of submission guidelines when making decisions.

Research limitations/implications

The study of one country, though detecting requirements of journal selection behavior, cannot be generalized to the entire region.

Practical implications

The current study has academic implications as far as decisions on journal selection are concerned. University policymakers in Iran may consider re-examining their emphasis on academicians’ promotion policies at Iranian universities of medical sciences.

Originality/value

These findings may support the work of early-career researchers and those individuals (e.g., librarians) that serve them, as well as publishers and editors of scholarly journals.

A solution for breaking the language barrier

Global problems require global scientific solutions, but the dominance of the English language creates a large barrier for many non-English-proficient researchers to make their findings and knowledge accessible globally. Here, we propose integrating peer-language proofing and translation systems in preprint platforms as a solution for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion in science.

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.

International Scientific Collaboration Is Needed to Bridge Science to Society: USERN2020 Consensus Statement

Scientific collaboration has been a critical aspect of the development of all fields of science, particularly clinical medicine. It is well understood that myriads of benefits can be yielded by interdisciplinary and international collaboration. For instance, our rapidly growing knowledge on COVID-19 and vaccine development could not be attained without expanded collaborative activities. However, achieving fruitful results requires mastering specific tactics in collaborative efforts. These activities can enhance our knowledge, which ultimately benefits society. In addition to tackling the issue of the invisible border between different countries, institutes, and disciplines, the border between the scientific community and society needs to be addressed as well. International and transdisciplinary approaches can potentially be the best solution for bridging science and society. The Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN) is a non-governmental, non-profit organization and network to promote professional, scientific research and education worldwide. The fifth annual congress of USERN was held in Tehran, Iran, in a hybrid manner on November 7–10, 2020, with key aims of bridging science to society and facilitating borderless science. Among speakers of the congress, a group of top scientists unanimously agreed on The USERN 2020 consensus, which is drafted with the goal of connecting society with scientific scholars and facilitating international and interdisciplinary scientific activities in all fields, including clinical medicine.