-
B – Peer review quality22 December 2014Arns M. Open access is tiring out peer reviewers. Nature 2014;515:467 According to the author, as numbers of published articles rise, the scholarly review system must adapt to avoid unmanageable burdens and slipping standards. The result of the increased pressure on peer reviewers is that papers are assigned to reviewers who are not experts in the area. The author […]
-
B – What researchers perceive as unpublishable research22 December 2014Tsou A, Schickore J, Sugimoto CR. Unpublishable research: examining and organizing the “file drawer”. Learned Publishing 2014;27(4):253(doi: 10.1087/20140404) This articles aimed to explore through a survey what researchers perceive to be ‘unpublishable’ research. The results suggested that there is a perceived gap in scholarly communication. In particular, there are several types of research besides negative results that are perceived to […]
-
B – Research data and publishing22 December 2014Murphy F. Data and scholarly publishing: the transforming landscape. Learned Publishing 2014;27:S3-S7(doi: 10.1087/20140502) Research data has become an increasingly critical issue for publishers. Introducing a Learned Publishing special issue on research data and publishing, the author outlines some recent initiatives that are responding to policy directives, particularly the Project ODE (Opportunities for Data Exchange), funded […]
-
B – Writing style: abstract thoughts22 December 2014Anstey A. Writing style: abstract thoughts. British Journal of Dermatology 2014;171:205-206(di: 10.1111/bjd.13181) A well-written abstract is essential to direct potential readers towards your research. Most readers use electronic searches or content lists from favoured journals to identify potentially interesting papers. Data dissemination and retrieval systems operate almost exclusively at the level of titles and abstracts. […]
-
B – Evidence-based medicine in crisis?19 December 2014Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 2014;348:g3725(doi: 10.1136/bmj.g3725) The authors argue that, although evidence based medicine has had many benefits, it has also had some negative unintended consequences. They offer a preliminary agenda for the movement’s renaissance, refocusing on providing useable evidence that can be combined with […]
-
B – Academia gets social19 December 2014Owens B. Academia gets social. The Lancet 2014;384:1834-1835 The author examines the rise of academic social networking websites, such as Academia.edu and ResearchGate, and asks researchers how these sites are shaping their careers. These academic-focused social networks operate much like Facebook or LinkedIn. Researchers upload their latest research publications, and discuss the technical aspects of their work. […]
-
B – The peer review scam19 December 2014Ferguson C, Marcus A, Oransky I. Publishing: the peer-review scam. Nature 2014;515:480-482 When a handful of authors were caught reviewing their own papers, it exposed weaknesses in modern publishing systems. As the systems are made more technical and automated, there are more ways to game it. Some observers argue for changes to the way that […]
-
B – Publishing and evidence-based medicine in Asia16 December 2014Yamshchikov GV, Schmid GP. Publication practices and attitudes towards evidence-based medicine in central Asia. The Lancet Global Health 2013;1(2):e73-e74 (doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70022-6) To assess the current contribution of central Asian scientists to medical science, the authors analyzed the quantity and scope of medical literature from central Asia published between January 2009 and July 2011. To ascertain […]
-
B – The top 100 papers16 December 2014Van Noorden R, Maher B, Nuzzo R. The top 100 papers. Nature 2014;514:550-553 Nature asked Thomson Reuters, which now owns the SCI, to list the 100 most highly cited papers of all time. Surprisingly, many of the world’s most famous papers do not make the cut. Most of the 100 papers describe experimental methods or […]
-
B – Compliance of retraction notices with COPE guidelines16 December 2014Singh Balhara YP, Mishra A. Compliance of retraction notices for retracted articles on mental disorders with COPE guidelines on retraction. Current Science 2014;107(5):757-760 This study aimed at assessing the compliance of retraction notices for articles on mental disorders with COPE guidelines, and the impact of open access on post-retraction citation of retracted articles. There seemed to […]
-
B – Health news and academic press releases16 December 2014Sumner P, Vivian-Griffiths S, Boivin J, et al. The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study. BMJ 2014;349:g7015(doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7015) This article aims to identify the source (press releases or news) of distortions, exaggerations, or changes to the main conclusions drawn from research that could potentially influence a […]
-
B – Five-step authorship framework16 December 2014Marušić A, Hren D, Mansi B, et al. Five-step authorship framework to improve transparency in disclosing contributors to industry-sponsored clinical trial publications. BMC Medicine 2014;12(197)(doi:10.1186/s12916-014-0197-z)This article describes a research project led by the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices (MPIP) Initiative to identify current challenges when determining authorship for industry-sponsored clinical trials. As a result, the […]
