Publication rates of abstracts presented at American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons annual open and closed conferences: 2015-2019

Background

The annual meetings hosted by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) present the latest prepublication literature in shoulder and elbow surgery, facilitating early dissemination of novel findings that impact clinical decision-making. Evaluating the publication rate of presented abstracts at ASES conferences becomes crucial in assessing the quality of research showcased, as these presentations often precede the peer-review process.

Methods

The ASES conference programs from 2015-2019 were reviewed to identify presented abstracts. For each abstract, the title, author(s), conference year, and meeting type (open vs. closed) were recorded. The names of the author(s) of each abstract were searched in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases to determine if there was an associated published manuscript. For each identified manuscript, the title, author(s), date of publication, publishing journal, impact factor of the publishing journal, level of evidence, and number of citations were recorded.

Results

A total of 316 abstracts were presented as podium lectures at ASES open and closed meetings between 2015 and 2019. Within 3 years of presentation, 240 (75.9%) of the presented abstracts resulted in publication. There was an increase in the proportion of abstracts resulting in publication within 3 years of the presentation from 2015-2019 (R = 0.8733, P = .053). Overall, the proportion of presented abstracts that went on to publication in peer-reviewed journals also increased (R = 0.8907, P = .043). Manuscripts of abstracts presented at open meetings had a shorter time to publication (8.78 vs. 11.82 months; P = .0160) and were cited more often (40.89 vs. 30.11, P = .0099) than those presented at closed meetings.

Conclusion

There has been an increase in the publication rate of abstracts presented at ASES annual meetings in the study period. Published manuscripts of abstracts presented at ASES open conferences were published faster, and were cited more often, than closed conferences. ASES conferences allow for the presentation of high-quality prepublication literature in shoulder and elbow surgery.

Reporting of interventional clinical trial results in an academic center: a survey of completed studies

BACKGROUND

The dissemination of clinical trial results is an important scientific and ethical endeavour. This survey of completed interventional studies in a French academic center describes their reporting status.

METHODS

We explored all interventional studies sponsored by Rennes University Hospital identified on the French Open Science Monitor which tracks trials registered on EUCTR or clinicaltrials.gov, and provides an automatic assessment of the reporting of results. For each study, we ascertained the actual reporting of results using systematic searches on the hospital internal database, bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed), and by contacting all principal investigators (PIs). We describe several features (including total budget and numbers of trial participants) of the studies that did not report any results.

RESULTS

The French Open Science Monitor identified 93 interventional studies, among which 10 (11%) reported results. In contrast, our survey identified 36 studies (39%) reporting primary analysis results and an additional 18 (19%) reporting results for secondary analyses (without results for their primary analysis). The overall budget for studies that did not report any results was estimated to be €5,051,253 for a total of 6,735 trial participants. The most frequent reasons for the absence of results reported by PIs were lack of time for 18 (42%), and logistic difficulties (e.g. delay in obtaining results or another blocking factor) for 12 (28%). An association was found between non-publication and negative results (adjusted Odds Ratio = 4.70, 95% Confidence Interval [1.67;14.11]).

CONCLUSIONS

Even allowing for the fact that automatic searches underestimate the number of studies with published results, the level of reporting was disappointingly low. This amounts to a waste of trial participants' implication and money. Corrective actions are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://osf.io/q5hcs.

Impact of Open Access status on journal metrics in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology - A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

While Open Access (OA) journals provide free access to articles, they entail high article processing charges (APC), limiting opportunities for young researchers and those from low-middle income countries to publish OA.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study, evaluating APC and academic impact of full OA (FOA) journals in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) compared to hybrid journals. Data were collected from Journal Citation Reports and journals' websites.

RESULTS

Among 255 journals, median APC was 2850 (interquartile range [IQR] 1325-3654$). Median APC for 120 FOA journals was significantly lower than for 119 hybrid journals (2000, IQR 648-2767$ versus 3550, IQR 2948-4120$, p < 0.001). FOA journals had lower citation numbers and impact metrics compared to hybrid journals.

CONCLUSION

While FOA ID/CM journals have lower APCs, they also lower academic impact compared to hybrid journals. These findings highlight the need for reforms in the publication process in view of achieving equitable data dissemination.

Words matter: Use caution when interpreting study's results!

We read the study of Bhatt and colleagues titled "Longitudinal changes in cognitive and physical function and health-related quality of life in older adults with acute myeloid leukaemia" published in Journal of Geriatric Oncology in January 2024. We commented in regards to the importance of the wording to be used when interpreting the results of research studies.

Effective Manuscript Preparation and Submission

Authors have a wide range of journals to which they can submit their report for consideration for publication. One key to getting the journal editors to accept a report is that the manuscript is properly organized and in compliance with the journal's Guide for Authors. For this reason, the single most important undertaking that an author can do before submission is read the journal's Guide for Authors and make sure that the report meets the journal's requirements for publication. If the subject matter is interesting and scientifically rigorous, then a well-written manuscript that complies with the journal's requirements will likely cruise through the peer review process and get accepted for publication. With this in mind, we now break down the elements of a report of original research and describe useful details that enhance the manuscript and leave little to revise.

The Inside Scoop: What We Learnt About Getting into Academic Publishing During Our Editorial Internship

The world of publication can seem intimidating and closed to the newcomer. How then does one even begin to get a foot in the door? In this paper, the authors draw from the literature and their recent lived experience as editorial interns to consider this challenge under the theme of access, and how it overlaps with the various components of academic publication. The main three components of the publication 'machine' are discussed in this article, authoring, reviewing, and editing. These are preceded by the first, and arguably foundational, interaction with academic journal publishing-reading. Without reading articles across different journals, and even in different disciplines, understanding the breadth of scholarship and its purpose is impossible. The subsequent components of authoring, reviewing, and editing, which are all enhanced by ongoing familiarity with current literature through further reading, are considered in further detail in the remainder of this article, with practical advice provided as to how to gain access and experience in each of these areas, for example, writing non-research article manuscripts, engaging in collaborative peer review, and applying for editorial opportunities (with perseverance) when the opportunity presents itself. Medical education publication can seem daunting and closed to entry-level academics. This article is written to dispel this view, and challenges the notion that the world of publication is reserved for experts only. On the contrary, newcomers to the field are essential for academic publications to retain relevance, dynamism, and innovation particularly in the face of the changing landscape of medical education.

Effective Case Reports and Small Case Series

Once the mainstay of scientific journals, in the age of evidence-based medicine, case reports and small series are now considered to represent a lower hierarchy in the medical decision-making process. However, case reports and small series represent the culmination of the time-honored traditional medical education teaching method with the descriptive case presentation. Despite being infrequently cited as references, case reports and small series still offer important contributions to patient care. The authors present a review of the strengths and weaknesses of case reports and small series and discuss ways to incorporate this form of literature into structured medical education.

Delayed publication of clinical trials in gynecologic oncology

OBJECTIVES

Delays in clinical trial publication can hinder timely implementation of evidence-based practices. We sought to determine publication rates and time to publication for clinical trials addressing gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

All clinical trials addressing gynecologic cancers in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry with a primary completion date between 1/1/2018 and 1/1/2020 were identified. The primary outcome was publication rate. All included studies had been completed for at least 3 years. Secondary outcomes were time to publication and associations between publication rate and sponsor, cancer type, and the number and location of primary study sites.

RESULTS

Of the 290 trials included, 161 (55.5%) had a peer-reviewed publication for the primary outcome within at least 3 years after completion. Of these, 123 had positive results (76.4%) and 38 were negative (23.6%). The average duration from primary completion to manuscript publication was 23.6 months (SD 13.9; median 21.4, IQR 15.1-32.4). Only 73 had results posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry (25.2%). Studies with positive findings had a significantly faster time to publication than those with negative results (22.0 mo vs 29.0 mo, p = 0.009). There was no significant difference between publication rate and funding source, cancer type, or location and number of primary sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Timely publication of clinical trials addressing gynecologic cancers remains an issue. Studies with positive findings were published faster than those with negative results, but the average publication time was still almost 2 years from trial completion. Further efforts should be made to identify and address barriers to clinical trial publication.

The most influential articles on stem cells in intervertebral disc degeneration

BACKGROUND

Stem cell-related studies have been increasingly conducted to facilitate the regeneration of degenerative discs. However, analyses of high-impact articles focused on this topic are rare. This study aimed to determine and summarize the most-cited studies examining stem cells in the context of intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD).

METHODS

We searched the Web of Science (WoS) database for stem cell-related articles in IDD, and the 50 highest-cited papers were summarized. A correlation analysis was conducted to determine the relationship among WoS citations, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), and Dimensions.

RESULTS

The number of citations of the top 50 manuscripts ranged from 92 to 370. The top three countries were the United States (14), China (10), and Japan (9). Spine (12) was the most prevalent journal, and this was followed by Biomaterials (6). Bone marrow-derived stem cells were the most common subject (38), and they were followed by nucleus pulposus-derived stem cells (4) and annulus fibrosus-derived stem cells (4). Humans were the most studied species (31), and the next most studied were rabbits (9) and rats (7). There was a very high correlation between WoS and Dimension citations (p < 0.001, r = 0.937).

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time, the highest impact articles examining stem cells in the context of IDD were assessed together. The current study provides a deepened understanding of historical studies focused on stem cells in IDD and is beneficial for future studies in this field.

Nationwide Analysis of Medical Student Publications upon Entry into Residency

Research participation has been increasingly emphasized in undergraduate medical education, but limited data are available to help students formulate realistic and attainable goals for scholarly productivity. This study provides an objective, all-specialty, nationally representative estimate of PubMed-indexed publications among the 2022 cohort of new interns in the USA, representing their scholarly productivity during medical school. Only 39% of interns included in the analysis had any publications during medical school, and mean number of publications (1.4 ± 3.9) was well below the mean self-reported total of abstracts, presentations, and publications attributed to the same cohort based on residency application data (7.9).

Relationships among cost, citation, and access in journal publishing by an ecology and evolutionary biology department at a U.S. university

Background

Optimizing access to high-quality scientific journals has become an important priority for academic departments, including the ability to read the scientific literature and the ability to afford to publish papers in those journals. In this contribution, we assess the question of whether institutional investment in scientific journals aligns with the journals where researchers send their papers for publication, and where they serve as unpaid reviewers and editors.

Methods

We assembled a unique suite of information about the publishing habits of our Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, including summaries of 3,540 journal publications by 35 faculty members. These data include economic costs of journals to institutions and to authors, benefits to authors in terms of journal prestige and citation rates, and considerations of ease of reading access for individuals both inside and outside the university. This dataset included data on institutional costs, including subscription pricing (rarely visible to scholars), and "investment" by scholars in supporting journals, such as time spent as editors and reviewers.

Results

Our results highlighted the complex set of relationships between these factors, and showed that institutional costs often do not match well with payoffs in terms of benefits to researchers (e.g., citation rate, prestige of journal, ease of access). Overall, we advocate for greater cost-benefit transparency to help compare different journals and different journal business models; such transparency would help both researchers and their institutions in investing wisely the limited resources available to academics.

Research barriers in Saudi pharmacy residency training programs

Background

The aim of this study is to identify potential barriers to conducting and publishing pharmacy residency research.

Methods

A cross-sectional study surveyed pharmacy residents in Saudi Arabia from August to September 2020. The online survey assesses residents' characteristics, residency research experience, barriers to completion, and challenges in publishing. A Likert scale assessed factors and barriers to conducting and publishing research during residency. Descriptive statistics were performed for binary variables, with Likert scale responses visualized using Gannt charts.

Results

A total of 69 residents completed the survey, of whom 63.5 percent were female, and the median age was 28 years. More than half of the residents were in R2 (56.5 %), followed by R1 (24.6 %) and R3 (4.4 %). Half of residents had prior research experience, while 84.1 % had prior research training in workshops or courses. Cohort study design was the most common type of residency research project conducted. According to residents, the main barriers to conducting research were a lack of allocated time for research during rotations (81.7 %) and a lack of a realistic timeline determined by the SCFHS to finish the research project (66.2 %). Regarding barriers to publishing research, the majority of residents reported lack of time to work on the publication process (78.6 %), lack of previous publication experience (60 %), and lack of guidance from mentors (55.7 %) as the most important barriers.

Conclusion

Pharmacy residents face barriers to conducting research during their residency program, including limited allocated time during rotations, a lack of realistic timelines, and data collection limitations. Additionally, they face challenges in publishing their research due to a lack of experience, mentorship, and guidance. Future research should consider seeking the perspective of residency program directors and preceptors on research barriers and evaluating the publication rate of residents' projects.

The 100 most cited articles on trachoma: a bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVE

Trachoma is the cause of blindness or visual impairment in 1.9 million people. Few bibliometric studies have been carried out, but none explore the characteristics of the 100 most cited articles on trachoma.

METHODS

A keyword-based search without time restriction was performed in September 2022 using the Scopus database. Search keywords include the following: "trachoma; trachome; tracoma; trachomatis." Two authors independently screened the literature and extracted data. The search result was obtained to classify the 100 articles according to their number of citations.

RESULTS

The Top 100 articles were published between 1957 and 2015 with a total of 11,102 citations (range 56-689). The country with the most significant contribution was the USA (n = 56). The Lancet was the most active journal (n = 15). Bailey RL was the author with the highest number of publications (n = 30). The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation (n = 26) was the most prominent funding entity. The type of original article was the most published (n = 83), in addition, the most frequent thematic area was prevention (n = 33). The most popular keywords were trachoma (n = 93), chlamydia trachomatis (n = 55), and azithromycin (n = 34).

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides new insight into trachoma research, information that may help healthcare providers, researchers, and stakeholders better understand trends and influential contributions. It highlights under-researched areas that could be the basis for future research.

"Publish or Perish": barriers to research publication in an undergraduate medical research program

OBJECTIVES

Publication is one of the crucial parameters in research, and the inability to publish has been noted in many medical students' projects due to different reasons. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine the obstacles that prevented medical students in a health science university from publishing their research from 2018 to 2021. First, an online survey was distributed to assess the obstacles to publication perceived by the medical students. Second, a total of 81 research projects were evaluated by scientific reviewers and their final decision about the publication was recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 162 students filled out the survey. The barriers faced by the students were various. They included an unsupportive research supervisor, a lack of time, an insufficient sample size, and many others. In the reviewer's evaluation, out of 81 projects, 70 projects (86.4%) were recommended to be published after minor or major modifications, while 11 projects (13.6%) were rejected due to poor writing style, poor results interpretation, and incorrect methodology.

CONCLUSION

Articulating the barriers to undergraduate medical research publication is important in boosting publication rates and research experience of graduating medical students. Medical research educators and research supervisors should strongly consider creating a framework that tackles existing obstacles and any future matters.

Presentation and publication skills: Publication governance and pitfalls to avoid

There are several pitfalls in the publication process that researchers can fall victim to, and these can occur knowingly or unknowingly. Although some of these errors may have occurred in good faith, disregard of publication governance is a dangerous practice and could bring authors and their co-authors into disrepute. We highlight some of these potential pitfalls, acquaint the reader with some rules that need to be adhered to in research and publishing, and help the reader learn how to avoid tripping-up on the road to publication.

A 20-year bibliometric analysis of postoperative pulmonary complications: 2003-2022

Background

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are known to adversely affect surgical outcomes and patient prognoses, yet no published study provides a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the latest trends and developments in the field of PPCs. Therefore, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of 20 years of publications related to PPCs.

Methods

We examined publications on PPCs published between 2003 and 2022 in the Web of Science Core Collection database to assess trends in the field in four dimensions: trends in publications, major research power, keywords, and co-cited publications.

Results

A total of 1881 articles were analyzed using CiteSpace and VOSviewer. Overall, the number of publications on PPCs has increased in the last two decades, with 42.72% of the publications being produced in the last five years. The United States of America had the highest number of articles, accounting for 21.91% of the total. The institution with the highest number of publications was the University of Genoa, which published 54 articles and showed a general lack of inter-institutional collaboration. The most productive author was Paolo Pelosi, with no core group of authors identified in the field of PPCs. The keyword co-occurrence analysis indicated that the focus of research has shifted over the past 20 years in terms of risk factors, type of surgery, and so on, while "enhanced recovery", "prehabilitation", "driving pressure" and "sugammadex" have received the most recent attention. In the analysis of co-cited literature, the most recent clusters that received attention were driving pressure, lung cancer patient, enhanced recovery, and neuromuscular blockade.

Conclusion

This bibliometric study suggests that pulmonary protective ventilation strategies, neuromuscular blockade reversal, and pulmonary prehabilitation strategy will be the focus of attention in the coming period. More large-scale studies and strengthened institutional collaboration are necessary to generate robust evidence for guiding individualized prevention of PPCs.

Is ChatGPT a "Fire of Prometheus" for Non-Native English-Speaking Researchers in Academic Writing?

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have garnered considerable interest for their potential to aid non-native English-speaking researchers. These models can function as personal, round-the-clock English tutors, akin to how Prometheus in Greek mythology bestowed fire upon humans for their advancement. LLMs can be particularly helpful for non-native researchers in writing the Introduction and Discussion sections of manuscripts, where they often encounter challenges. However, using LLMs to generate text for research manuscripts entails concerns such as hallucination, plagiarism, and privacy issues; to mitigate these risks, authors should verify the accuracy of generated content, employ text similarity detectors, and avoid inputting sensitive information into their prompts. Consequently, it may be more prudent to utilize LLMs for editing and refining text rather than generating large portions of text. Journal policies concerning the use of LLMs vary, but transparency in disclosing artificial intelligence tool usage is emphasized. This paper aims to summarize how LLMs can lower the barrier to academic writing in English, enabling researchers to concentrate on domain-specific research, provided they are used responsibly and cautiously.

Publication Rates and Characteristics of Clinical Trials in Deep Brain and Responsive Neurostimulation

INTRODUCTION

Prompt dissemination of clinical trial results is essential for ensuring the safety and efficacy of intracranial neurostimulation treatments, including deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neurostimulation (RNS). However, the frequency and completeness of results publication, and reasons for reporting delays, are unknown. Moreover, the patient populations, targeted anatomical locations, and stimulation parameters should be clearly reported for both reproducibility and to identify lacunae in trial design. Here, we examine DBS and RNS trials from 1997 to 2022, chart their characteristics, and examine rates and predictors of results reporting.

METHODS

Trials were identified using ClinicalTrials.gov. Associated publications were identified using ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed.gov. Pearson's χ2 tests were used to assess differences in trial characteristics between published and unpublished trials.

RESULTS

Across 449 trials, representing a cumulative cohort of 42,769 patient interventions, there were 37 therapeutic indications and 44 stimulation targets. The most common indication and target were Parkinson's disease (40.55%) and the subthalamic nucleus (35.88%), respectively. Only 0.89% of trials were in pediatric patients (11.58% were mixed pediatric and adult). Explored targets represented 75% of potential basal ganglia targets but only 29% of potential thalamic targets. Allowing a 1-year grace period after trial completion, 34/169 (20.12%) had results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, and 107/169 (63.31%) were published. ∼80% of published trials included details about stimulation parameters used. Published and unpublished trials did not significantly differ by trial characteristics.

CONCLUSION

We highlight key knowledge and performance gaps in DBS and RNS trial research. Over one-third of trials remain unpublished >1 year after completion; pediatric trials are scarce; most of the thalamus remains unexplored; about one-in-five trials fail to report stimulation parameters; and movement disorders comprise the most studied indications.

How international are the editorial boards in the field of hand research? A cross-sectional study of leading subspecialty hand journals

BACKGROUND

Although low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have great disease burden, but the lack of studies from LMIC have been shown in several fields. Multiple researchers from LMIC perceive editorial bias against their studies. Editorial board members (EBMs) from LMIC are under-represented across many medical journals. It is still unclear whether this phenomenon exists in the field of hand research. The purpose of this study was to investigate the composition of EBMs in leading subspecialty hand journals, and to reveal the international representation of EBMs in the field of hand research.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included seven leading subspecialty hand journals. The EBMs were obtained from the journals' websites. The country affiliations of EBMs were categorized based on their locations and economy status. The composition of EBMs was investigated.

RESULTS

There were 211 EBMs in the seven journals. A total of 185 EBMs (87.7%) were affiliated with high-income countries (HIC), 18 (8.5%) with upper middle-income countries, and 8 (3.8%) with lower middle-income countries. None EBMs were affiliated with low income countries. The EBMs were affiliated with 30 countries. The biggest number of EBMs were affiliated with the USA 74 (35.07%), followed by the United Kingdom (45, 21.33%), and France (13, 6.16%). Most of EBMs were based in Europe and Central Asia (86, 40.8%) and North America (81, 38.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The EBMs of leading subspecialty hand journals are dominated by HIC with a very low representation of LMIC. There is a need to make the editorial boards more international in the field of hand research.

Reporting quality of CONSORT flow diagrams in published early phase dose-finding clinical trial reports: Improvement is needed

BACKGROUND

This project aims to: (1) assess the completeness of information in flow diagrams of published early phase dose-finding (EPDF) trials based on CONSORT recommendations, and if additional features on dose (de-)escalation were presented; (2) propose new flow diagrams presenting how doses were (de-)escalated throughout the trial.

METHODS

Flow diagrams were extracted from a random sample of 259 EPDF trials, published from 2011 to 2020 indexed in PubMed. Diagrams were scored out of 15 following CONSORT recommendations with an additional score for presence of (de-)escalation. New templates were proposed for features that were deficient and presented to 39 methodologists and 11 clinical trialists in October and December 2022.

RESULTS

98 (38%) papers included a flow diagram. Flow diagrams were most deficient in the reporting of reasons for lost to follow up (2%) and reasons for not receiving allocated intervention (14%). Few (39%) presented sequential dose-decision stages. Of voting methodologists, 33/38 (87%) agreed or strongly agreed that for participants recruited in cohorts, presenting the (de-)escalation steps in the flow diagram is a useful feature, also expressed by the trial investigators. Most workshop attendees (35/39, 90%) preferred a larger dose to be displayed higher up within the flow diagram than a smaller dose.

CONCLUSION

Most published trials do not provide a flow diagram, and for those that do, essential information is often omitted. EPDF flow diagrams capturing information on participant flow in the trial's journey, encapsulated within one figure, are highly recommended to promote transparency and interpretability of trial results.

Four Decades of Foot and Ankle Research Activity: A Scientometric study of Subspecialty Foot and Ankle Journals

Objectives

To evaluate foot and ankle documents using scientometric methods and provide insight into global research activities.

Methods

This scientometric study was conducted at the Department of Spine Surgery, Ganzhou People's Hospital, China. Documents on foot and ankle from 1980 to 2019 were retrieved from the Scopus database. The number of documents, year of publication, journal, country, institution, author, h-index, and top-cited documents were analyzed.

Results

In total, 11313 documents were retrieved. The annual research output on foot and ankle showed a dramatic increase over the past four decades, especially in the past decade (p = 0.000). Foot & Ankle International published the biggest number of documents (44.48%). The United States contributed more than half (52.17%) of the global production, followed by the United Kingdom (11.39%), and Germany (3.62%). The United States had the highest h-index (109). The Hospital for Special Surgery (1.87%) ranked first in terms of productivity, followed by Union Memorial Hospital (1.37%), and Duke University Medical Center (1.24%). The most productive author was Myerson MS (1.25%), followed by Schon LC (0.77%), and Hyer CF (0.74%).

Conclusion

Research on foot and ankle has thrived rapidly over the past four decades, particularly in the last decade. The United States contributes the most to the quantity and quality of foot and ankle documents.

Guidance for Qualitative Research Manuscripts in Pharmacy Education

The goal of this Best Practice Review is to support researchers in successfully preparing and publishing qualitative research in pharmacy education. Standard practice from the literature and journals' guidance from related fields were reviewed, and recommendations and resources applicable to qualitative research in pharmacy education were compiled for researchers planning to conduct and publish qualitative research. This review provides recommendations, not requirements, for publication in the Journal and is intended to be a guide, especially for authors and reviewers relatively new to the field of qualitative research. Additionally, researchers planning to publish their qualitative research are advised to review available best practices and standards, such as the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist and the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Given the diverse methodology of qualitative research, it is important for authors to provide sufficient details and justifications of selected methods for transparency and to report collected results in a manner that allows reviewers and readers to adequately assess the validity of their study and the applicability of the findings.

Publication rate and factors associated with publication of research projects by obstetrics residents in an academic department over 10 years

OBJECTIVES

To determine the publication rate of mandatory research projects conducted by obstetrics residents and to evaluate the publication-associated factors and reported obstacles.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study included all consecutive residents in an academic obstetrics-gynecology department in Paris, France, between 2010 and 2020. All residents were required to conduct a research project. Information about publication was collected by searching PubMed. A closed-ended questions questionnaire was sent to former residents about their characteristics, subsequent professional development, and research project characteristics. Factors associated with publication were identified by univariable and multivariable analysis with logistic regression.

RESULTS

During the study period, 156 residents trained in our obstetrics-gynecology department. The overall publication rate was 30.8% (48/156) and the median time to publication 27 months (IQR, 18-37). The resident was first author in 36 (75.0%) publications. Among the 130 (83.3%) residents who completed the questionnaire, 43 (33%) had published their research project. Overall, 74/130 (60.8%) residents used their project for their mandatory medical thesis. Factors associated with publication in univariable analysis were younger age (median), completion of a PhD, planned career in academic medicine, prospective study design, presentation at a conference or congress and use their project for their medical thesis. The only factors associated with publication in the multivariable analysis were planned career in academic medicine (aOR 5.62 95 %CI[1.84-17.19]) and the prospective study design of the research project (aOR 6.1 95 %CI[1.24-29.56]). The main reasons for nonpublication reported by resident were lack of time and failure to complete the project.

CONCLUSION

Among the mandatory clinical research projects conducted by obstetrics residents over a decade in our department, 30.8% were published. The main factors associated with publication were planned career in academic medicine and a prospective design of the research project.

How to select a journal for your research

Publication in a peer-reviewed journal is the goal of any research project. One of the most important (and possibly the least understood) aspects of the publication process is the choice of a suitable journal that is likely to accept your work. Detailed information and tips and tricks to success are given in this editorial.

ChatGPT and conversational artificial intelligence: Friend, foe, or future of research?

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are increasingly utilized across healthcare. More recently, there has been a rise in the use AI within research, particularly through novel conversational AI platforms, such as ChatGPT. In this Controversies paper, we discuss the advantages, limitations, and future directions for ChatGPT and other forms of conversational AI in research and scholarly dissemination.

The relation between social media mentions and academic citations in orthodontic journals: A preliminary study

BACKGROUND

To study the relation between social media mentions and academic citations for articles published in peer-reviewed orthodontic journals.

METHODS

Articles published in early 2018 in seven peer-reviewed orthodontic journals were retrospectively analyzed in September 2022. Citation counts of the articles were evaluated using two databases: Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). The Altmetric Attention Score, Twitter, Facebook mentions, and Mendeley reads were tracked using the Altmetric Bookmarklet. The citation counts and social media mentions were correlated using Spearman rho.

RESULTS

A total of 84 articles were identified during the initial search; 64 (76%) were original studies and systematic review articles and included in the analysis. A total of 38% of the articles had at least one mention on social media. Over the study period, the average number of citations of the articles mentioned on social media was higher than the non-mentioned articles for GS and WoS, respectively. Moreover, significant positive correlations existed between the Altmetric Attention Score and the number of citations in GS and WoS (r_s = 0.31, P = 0.001 and r_s = 0.26, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Social media mentions and citations of articles published in peer-reviewed orthodontic journals are correlated, with a clear difference in the number of citations in articles mentioned on social media versus those not mentioned, indicating possible increased reach of articles disseminated on social media.

Bibliometric analyses of publications in the field of restless legs syndrome

PURPOSE

Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) is a chronic neurological disorder and the incidence of RLS is a more common disease than known is accepted. This study was performed to identify and analyze the characteristics of RLS-related articles published from 2001 to 2020 using bibliometric analyses.

METHODS

RLS-related articles published from 2001 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database with predefined search terms. VOSviewer software was used to visualize various bibliographic coupling networks on data. The top 10 lists (about organizations, papers, journals, most commonly cited articles, authors, countries, and keywords) extracted from 2001 to 2020 were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 2311 articles were included and the total number of publications from 2001 to 2020 was increased by 5.02-fold. The highest number of RLS publications (n = 171) since 2001 was observed in 2020. The United States is contributed the highest number of RLS-related publications (34.53%). The top productive journal was Sleep Medicine and the most prominent organization was Johns Hopkins University. In the list of top 10 authors, Allen RP was the first author.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first bibliometric analysis that provides a general perspective on the RLS from 2001 to 2020 and may be useful as a guide for further research in this field.

h-Index, Journal Citation Indicator, and Other Impact Factors in Neurosurgical Publications: Is There a Cost Factor That Determines the Quality?

OBJECTIVE

There has been an increase in number of Neurosurgical publications, including open access (OA), in recent years. We aimed to compare journals' performance and the relationship to submission fees incurred in publication.

METHODS

We identified 53 journals issuing neurosurgery-related work. Quantitative analysis from various search engines involved obtaining h-index, Journal Citation Indicator (JCI), and other metrics such as Immediacy Index and 5-year impact factor utilising Journal Citation Reports. OA fees and individual subscription fees were collected. Correlations were produced using Spearman rho (ρ) (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Median h-index for 53 journals was 54 (range: 0-292), with JCI median reported as 0.785 (range: 0-2.45). Median Immediacy Index was 0.797 (range: 0-4.076), and median for 5-year impact factor was 2.76 (range: 0-12.704). There was a very strong positive correlation between JCI and Immediacy Index, JCI and 5-year impact factor, and 5-year impact factor and Immediacy Index (ρ > 0.7, P < 0.05). It is unclear whether there was any correlation between the indices and the OA costs and subscription costs for personal usage (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Larger costs incurred for OA fees and subscription costs for personal use do not clearly reflect on the journals' performance, as quantified by using various indices. There appears to be a strong association with performance across the journals' metrics. It would be beneficial to include learning about bibliometric indices' impact for research publications in medical education training to maximize the quality of the scientific work produced and increase the visibility of the information produced. The potential full movement to exclusively OA journals would create a significant barrier for junior researchers, small institutions, and full time-trainee physicians with limited funding available. This study suggests the need for a robust measurement of journals' output and the quality of the work produced.

Tips and guidelines for being a good peer reviewer

Publication is the key means by which science spreads. The purpose of scientific journals is to publish novel and quality articles. The editors of the journals evaluate the content of the manuscripts by submitting them to a process called «peer review», considered today the gold standard to guarantee the adequate publication of scientific articles. A well-crafted and critical peer-review report is a treasure for both authors and editors. In the present manuscript we will examine the key aspects of the peer review process. We will begin by explaining what exactly this process consists of and since when it has existed, and then clarifying why it is so important. Then we will argue why we should want to be reviewers of scientific papers. We will then review what are the fundamental rules to carry out a good review of a manuscript and what aspects of it we should focus on. Later we will see what format a peer review report should have and how to write its different sections, as well as the options for its final resolution. We will pay special attention to commenting on the ethical aspects and the most frequent errors that are made in the evaluation of manuscripts. Finally, we will recognize what the fundamental limitations of peer review are, and we will end by proposing some suggestions for their improvement. Our ultimate goal is to stimulate researchers -and authors- to go one step further and undertake the challenge of being peer reviewers of scientific manuscripts.

'Mind-forg'd Manacles': Virtual Experience and Innocent Publication

In Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller ('Voller') the Australian High Court held that media companies maintaining Facebook comment pages could be liable for the defamatory posts of commenters on those sites. The decision focussed entirely on whether, by maintaining the Facebook page, the companies had 'published' the statements of commenters. Hearings on other aspects of the tort litigation continue. This paper considers the implications of the tort of defamation on public participation on political will formation where, as is increasingly the case, the participation occurs virtually. Australian law has already tackled the law of defamation as a threat to freedom of political communication; Voller continues the jurisprudence by considering whether hosting an online forum for debate amounts to publication. The more recent High Court judgment in Google LLC v Defteros demonstrated the necessity of the law to align the 'acts' necessary to found legal action with the new environment of automated search engines. The troubled intersection of dematerialised practices of political and cultural discourse and jurisdictionally bound laws of defamation challenges participatory governance as tribes form and dissolve and shift between geographical interests. Defamation in Australia is a tort of strict liability; and, absenting applicable defences, any participation in communication is sufficient to make that participant a publisher and a party to the defamation. The online environment stretches words across geographical and jurisdictional boundaries, but it also stretches and contorts concepts of fault and responsibility. Participatory digital cultural practices integrating users in the creation of cultural heritage simultaneously draw participants into transgressions, both cultural and legal, which are amplified by the medium. Questions of collective guilt, 'shades' of moral responsibility and disproportionality between blameworthiness and legal liability challenge laws formulated for the printing press but now deployed in the online environment. In this way the digitized participatory environment presents deep challenges to law and legal systems, which are chained to geography. This paper considers the concept of innocent publication in the context of the digitized participatory environment and the way in which the virtual experience is dissolving concepts of geographically defined jurisdictions.

The life and death of living systematic reviews: a methodological survey

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study are to describe the characteristics of living systematic reviews (LSRs) and to understand their life cycles.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a comprehensive search up to April 2021 then selected articles and abstracted data in duplicate and independently. We undertook descriptive analyses and calculated delay in version update and delay since the last published version.

RESULTS

We included 76 eligible LSRs with a total of 279 eligible versions. The majority of LSRs was from the clinical field (70%), was COVID-19 related (63%), and had a funding source specified (62%). The median number of versions per LSR was 2 (interquartile range (IQR) 1-4; range 1-19). The median and IQR for the ratio of the actual period of update to the planned period of update was 1.12 (0.81; 1.71). Out of all reviews with a 'planned period of update' and at least one update (N = 19), eight LSRs (42%) had a period since last published version greater than 3 times the planned period of update. No LSR included a 'retirement notice' in their latest published version.

CONCLUSION

While most LSR complied with the planned period of producing updates, a substantive proportion lagged since their last update.

Comment on the article: The state of social science research on COVID‑19

A well-written and interesting article was published on November 21, 2021. Future relevant studies, however, may be improved by implementing (1) a framework that outlines the overall research; (2) an author-weighted scheme (AWS) that accurately quantifies the contributions of entities to articles; and (3) a more appropriate size for the nodes representing the proportional counts for each entity in social network analysis (SNA). VOSviewer was used to construct and visualize the scientometric networks and the relation-based analyses included three categories: (1) citation relations, (2) word cooccurrences, and (3) coauthorship relations. Nevertheless, the counts for each topical entity have not been consistently integrated. As a result, the nodes of the keyword co-occurrence network are large when compared to the number of connections between the entities or terms (i.e., the total number of relationships between co-occurring terms or entities). Additionally, all weighted counts in keywords (or the total link strength of a country/region) should equal the total number of documents (e.g., n = 9954 in that article). This would lead to biases in the calculation of publications (or citations) for entities, as is common in traditional SNA. This node illustrates a study framework and a couple of AWSs (i.e., equal and nonequal AWSs) to improve the article, and discusses the need to understand the requirement that the total centrality degree in SNA equals the total number of documents (or citations).

Text classification technique for discovering country-based publications from international COVID-19 publications

Objective

The significant increase in the number of COVID-19 publications, on the one hand, and the strategic importance of this subject area for research and treatment systems in the health field, on the other hand, reveals the need for text-mining research more than ever. The main objective of the present paper is to discover country-based publications from international COVID-19 publications with text classification techniques.

Methods

The present paper is applied research that has been performed using text-mining techniques such as clustering and text classification. The statistical population is all COVID-19 publications from PubMed Central® (PMC), extracted from November 2019 to June 2021. Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) was used for clustering, and support vector machine (SVM), scikit-learn library, and Python programming language were used for text classification. Text classification was applied to discover the consistency of Iranian and international topics.

Results

The findings showed that seven topics were extracted using the LDA algorithm for international and Iranian publications on COVID-19. Moreover, the COVID-19 publications show the largest share in the subject area of "Social and Technology in COVID-19" at the international (April 2021) and national (February 2021) levels with 50.61% and 39.44%, respectively. The highest rate of publications at international and national levels was in April 2021 and February 2021, respectively.

Conclusion

One of the most important results of this study was discovering a common trend and consistency of Iranian and international publications on COVID-19. Accordingly, in the topic category "Covid-19 Proteins: Vaccine and Antibody Response," Iranian publications have a common publishing and research trend with international ones.

Academic Productivity of Early Career Transfusion Medicine Specialists: A Workforce Study

Blood Banking/Transfusion Medicine (BB/TM) specialists oversee all aspects of blood component transfusions and are often involved with apheresis, coagulation, and cellular therapy services as well. This study characterizes the BB/TM workforce to determine the scholarly productivity in the first 3 to 5 years after obtaining board certification and the impact of job type, job location, and academic rank on scholarly productivity. Academic productivity was assessed among individuals passing the American Board of Pathology BB/TM board exam between 2016 and 2018 using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Portfolio Analysis tool, iCite. One hundred and 28 BB/TM specialists were included in the analysis. The majority of BB/TM specialists work in academia, are located in the Great Lakes and Mid-Atlantic regions, and have a rank of Assistant Professor. Since passing the board exam, 76.5% (98/128) of BB/TM specialists have published papers, with 4.0 (IQR = 1-8) total number of published papers per individual, and 791 total papers amongst the group. The median publications per individual per year since passing boards is 0.9 (IQR = 0.2-2.3) the number of publications per year since passing boards for BB/TM specialists in academia is significantly higher compared to other jobs at 1.33 (IQR, 0.5-2.89, Kruskal-Wallis P = .03) per individual Assistant Professors and Associate Professors (1.3, IQR= 0.4-2.7 and 1.4, IQR = 0.6-3.3, Mann-Whitney test P > .99). BB/TM specialists who passed the board exam between 2016 and 2018 are highly academically productive, especially those working in academia where publications are necessary for promotion. BB/TM physicians are an extensively trained and academically-minded group of practitioners.

Papers perpetually in press: intellect left to rot

BACKGROUND

One of the satisfactions of publishing a paper in an academic journal is seeing the process reach closure after potentially weeks or months of peer review and editorial processing. Typically, in the latter step, a proof is developed and the paper stays in press until the paper is assigned to a journal issue, in the case of a print journal. In some cases, it is possible to find papers that are in press for years.

AIMS

Although it is unclear why this is the case, when a paper stays in an "in limbo" status for so long, it almost defeats the purpose of rapid proof and online publication.

METHOD

The date of the last "in press" article was manually extracted and compared in 23 medicine-related journals indexed in Elsevier's Science Direct.

RESULTS

Among the 23 journals, "in press" articles ranged from less than one month to almost 16 years.

CONCLUSION

Editors and publishers should endeavor to publish all "in press" papers within a reasonable amount of time. If not, they should rethink their publication process so as not to leave the intellect of some academics in a perpetual state of publishing "limbo".