Search

The data paper is an emerging academic genre that focuses on the description of research data objects. However, there is a lack of empirical knowledge about this rising genre in quantitative science studies, particularly from the perspective of its linguistic features. To fill this gap, this research aims to offer a first quantitative examination of which rhetorical moves—rhetorical units performing a coherent narrative function—are used in data paper abstracts, as well as how these moves are used. To this end, we developed a new classification scheme for rhetorical moves in data paper abstracts by expanding a well‐received system that focuses on English‐language research article abstracts. We used this expanded scheme to classify and analyze rhetorical moves used in two flagship data journals, Scientific Data and Data in Brief. We found that data papers exhibit a combination of introduction, method, results, and discussion‐ and data‐oriented moves and that the usage differences between the journals can be largely explained by journal policies concerning abstract and paper structure. This research offers a novel examination of how the data paper, a data‐oriented knowledge representation, is composed, which greatly contributes to a deeper understanding of research data and its publication in the scholarly communication system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, it has been proposed that unrealistic requirements for academics and medical doctors to publish in scientific journals, combined with monetary publication rewards, have led to forms of contract cheating offered by organizations known as paper mills. Paper mills are alleged to offer products ranging from research data through to ghostwritten fraudulent or fabricated manuscripts and submission services. While paper mill operations remain poorly understood, it seems likely that paper mills need to balance product quantity and quality, such that they produce or contribute to large numbers of manuscripts that will be accepted for publication. Producing manuscripts at scale may be facilitated by the use of manuscript templates, which could give rise to shared features such as textual and organizational similarities, the description of highly generic study hypotheses and experimental approaches, digital images that show evidence of manipulation and/or reuse, and/or errors affecting verifiable experimental reagents. Based on these features, we propose practical steps that editors, journal staff, and peer reviewers can take to recognize and respond to research manuscripts and publications that may have been produced with undeclared assistance from paper mills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on following papers being accepted for publication in a future issue of the Health Information and Libraries Journal including survey of US academic libraries highlighting the COVID-19 experience.

This paper argues for a broad definition of philosophical sources and how Indigenous traditional knowledge fits that definition. It concludes by showing how, following the previous two points, an Indigenous document such as the Huarochirí Manuscript can be considered a philosophical source by academic philosophers. The paper has three sections: the first deals with the methodological point of addressing what can be considered as philosophy. This section presents a conversational approach to philosophy. This approach, although broad, properly captures the practices of inquiring about philosophical issues as is commonly done in Western academic circles, but without excluding the practices of non‐Western cultures from being labelled as philosophical. The second section argues for the analytical distinction between a philosophical source, a philosophical text, and a philosophical insight. It shows that what makes a philosophical source such are the philosophical insights that it can provide. The final section shows how the Huarochirí Manuscript has merits making it worthy of being considered a philosophical source and thus a relevant academic source for those working in the field of philosophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Submissions fell back slightly in 2023 to 474 manuscripts but remain above pre‐Covid levels. Despite the high number of submissions, there has been little change in the number of papers accepted for publication, with the acceptance rate in 2023 standing at 8%. The acceptance rate is considerably higher for papers originating from Europe and North America. Accepted papers are now routinely made available online as 'Early View'. The Journal's Impact Factor fell back slightly for 2022, but still compares favourably with other journals in the field of agricultural economics. Operational changes include revisions to the journal's webpage and authors' guidelines and a newly configured editorial team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: ChatGPT's role in medical writing is a topic of discussion. I experimented whether ChatGPT almost automatically generates Correspondence or Letter addressed to a "translated" article, and thereby wish to arouse discussion regarding ChatGPT use in medical writing. Methods: I input an English article of mine into ChatGPT, tasking it with generating an English Disagreement Letter (Letter 1). Next, I tasked ChatGPT with translating the manuscript addressed to from English‐French‐Spanish‐German. Then, I once again tasked ChatGPT with generating an English Disagreement Letter addressed to a German manuscript (triplicate translated manuscript) (Letter 2). Results: Letters 1 and 2 are readable and reasonable, shooting the point that the author (myself) felt as the weakness of the article. Letters addressed to French (single translation) and to Spanish (double translation) and longer Letters (corresponding to Letters 1 and 2) are also readable, and thus stand. Conclusions: Solely based on this experiment, one may be able to write a letter even without understanding the meaning of the paper being addressed, let alone the language of the paper. Although this humble experiment does not conclude anything, I plea for a comprehensive discussion on the implications of these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the first instalment of the Words of Advice series, we feature the essentials of good manuscript writing with practical tips on how to plan, organise and write a standout scientific paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented clarifying the scope of Nursing Inquiry and the types of manuscripts that align with its aims, including discursive papers, critical analyses, and theoretical debates on nursing and healthcare practices. It emphasizes the importance of avoiding a prescribed formula and standardized formats, and encourages authors to engage in critical reflection and present well-developed narrative logic in their submissions to advance the discipline's shared body of knowledge.

Many journals have strict word limits, and authors therefore spend considerable time shortening manuscripts. Here, we provide pointers for efficiently doing so while retaining key content. We include general guidance, tips for condensing the different parts of a scientific paper, and advice on what to avoid when shortening manuscripts. We hope that readers will find our guidance helpful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many journals have strict word limits, and authors therefore spend considerable time shortening manuscripts. Here, we provide pointers for efficiently doing so while retaining key content. We include general guidance, tips for condensing the different parts of a scientific paper, and advice on what to avoid when shortening manuscripts. We hope that readers will find our guidance helpful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Technology is being developed to support the peer review processes of journals, conferences, funders, universities, and national research evaluations. This literature and software summary discusses the partial or complete automation of several publishing‐related tasks: suggesting appropriate journals for an article, providing quality control for submitted papers, finding suitable reviewers for submitted papers or grant proposals, reviewing, and review evaluation. It also discusses attempts to estimate article quality from peer review text and scores as well as from post‐publication scores but not from bibliometric data. The literature and existing examples of working technology show that automation is useful for helping to find reviewers and there is good evidence that it can sometimes help with initial quality control of submitted manuscripts. Much other software supporting publishing and editorial work exists and is being used, but without published academic evaluations of its efficacy. The value of artificial intelligence (AI) to support reviewing has not been clearly demonstrated yet, however. Finally, whilst peer review text and scores can theoretically have value for post‐publication research assessment, it is not yet widely enough available to be a practical evidence source for systematic automation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on research community increasingly partners with consumers and community in the design and conduct of research. Topics include Recent studies have explored the perceptions of Editor-in-Chiefs regarding the acceptability for consumer co-researchers to be authors on papers; and authorship were developed by the scientific community to ensure appropriate attribution for the work.

This paper deals with the specific features of historical papers relevant for information retrieval and bibliometrics. The analysis is based mainly on the citation indexes accessible under the Web of Science (WoS) but also on field-specific databases: the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) literature database and the INSPEC database. First, the journal coverage of the WoS (in particular of the WoS Century of Science archive), the limitations of specific search fields as well as several database errors are discussed. Then, the problem of misspelled citations and their 'mutations' is demonstrated by a few typical examples. Complex author names, complicated journal names, and other sources of errors that result from prior citation practice are further issues. Finally, some basic phenomena limiting the meaning of citation counts of historical papers are presented and explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers suggestions to surgical trainees and academic surgeons who want to publish their research on how to respond to the reviewer's comments after submission of manuscripts to a journal. Topics include responses that can be received by a researcher from the journal editor including acceptance of the manuscript without any changes, and provisional acceptance; a cover letter required by journals to be attached by authors; and how to respond in case of rejection of the manuscript.

We studied the views of scientists who experience resistance to their new ideas by surveying a sample of 815 scientists who are authors of highly cited articles. The 132 responses (16.2%) received indicated that only 47 scientists (35.6%) had no problems with referees, editors, or other scientists. The most common causes of difficulty were rejection of the manuscript, and scepticism, ignorance, and incomprehension. The most common arguments given by referees against papers were that the findings were an insufficient advance to warrant publication, lacked practical impact, were based on a wrong hypothesis, or were based on a wrong concept. The strategies authors used to overcome resistance included obtaining help from someone to publish problematic papers, making changes in the text, and simple persistence. Despite difficulties, however, some respondents acknowledged the positive effect of peer review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A call for papers about a special issue of the journal on cognitive and applied ageing is presented.

The article offers information on the journal's invitation for submission of papers on the social psychology of precarity.

In this article the editor discusses how to comments and replies to published papers. topics discussed include comments on recently published manuscripts on relevant topics or wildlife management; mention about valid criticism of a published article on suitability for publication; and talks about comment criticizing with correcting simple erratum.

The authors present guidelines for nursing professionals in converting their conference presentation into a manuscript for submission to the journal. Considerations as outlined by the Medical Librarians association are its purpose, content and organization, style and conversion of the presentation. The authors also advises about the possible outcomes of a submission like the difficulty of a paper to get accepted and the need to respond to suggestions and comments by editors and reviewers.

In this article, the author discusses the efforts made by the editorial team of "Papers in Regional Science" to improve the journal. He says that the use of Internet based online submission and administration system for manuscript handling and management of the review process is more efficient than the paper trail based system. The author claims that the publication's page size was increased so that papers will be published within one year of acceptance. He cites submissions as one of the factors that enhance the reputation of the journal.

The article focuses on invitation for the submission of special issue concept papers which focuses on identification and treatment of substance abuse. Topics discussed include concept papers must have clear topics and tie proposed manuscripts, concept paper submitted must have a lead author who will function as guest editor, special issue will have manuscripts on unpublished research, it must be submitted through online submission system and will undergo peer review process.

The article offers information on how to write a manuscript. It says that Instructions to Authors is needed to detail the character total, word or the length of the page for manuscript, number of tables and figures allowed, and the word count or the total character for abstract. It adds that the key to achieve a good quality manuscript is to tell a story. Moreover, methods section take the reader on what interventions or experiments performed to the hypothesis formed for study.

Presents guidelines for the submission of manuscripts to 'The Philosophical Forum.'

The article presents the discussion on significant increase in the submission and publication of research papers in nutrition and dietetics which was associated with the COVID‐19 pandemic. Topics include recruited to participate in a study which utilised an online food frequency questionnaire to look at nutrient intake and to self‐report for having diagnosis of type‐2 diabetes; and food frequency questionnaires having low validity while assessing intakes of micronutrients and trace elements.

A call for papers on the subject of orthogeriatrics is presented.

Peer review is essential for advancing scientific research, but there are long‐standing concerns that authors' prestige or other characteristics can bias reviewers. Double‐blind peer review has been proposed as a way to reduce reviewer bias, but the evidence for its effectiveness is limited and mixed. Here, we examine the effects of double‐blind peer review by analyzing the review files of 5,027 papers submitted to a top computer science conference that changed its reviewing format from single‐ to double‐blind in 2018. First, we find that the scores given to the most prestigious authors significantly decreased after switching to double‐blind review. However, because many of these papers were above the threshold for acceptance, the change did not affect paper acceptance significantly. Second, the inter‐reviewer disagreement increased significantly in the double‐blind format. Third, papers rejected in the single‐blind format are cited more than those rejected under double‐blind, suggesting that double‐blind review better excludes poorer quality papers. Lastly, an apparently unrelated change in the rating scale from 10 to 4 points likely reduced prestige bias significantly such that papers' acceptance was affected. These results support the effectiveness of double‐blind review in reducing biases, while opening new research directions on the impact of peer‐review formats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of exploratory network analysis has increased in psychopathology research over the past decade. A benefit of exploratory network analysis is the wealth of information it can provide; however, a single analysis may generate more inferences than what can be discussed in one manuscript (e.g., centrality indices of each node). This necessitates that authors choose which results to discuss in further detail and which to omit. Without a guide for this process, the likelihood of a biased interpretation is high. We propose that the integration of theory throughout the research process makes the interpretation of exploratory networks more manageable for the researcher and more likely to result in an interpretation that advances science. The goals of this paper are to differentiate between exploratory and confirmatory network analyses, discuss the utility of exploratory work, and provide a practical framework that uses theory as a guide to interpret exploratory network analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Wittgenstein's manuscripts dating from 1929 and 1930, there are a number of entries on the notion of probability. In this paper, I explore Wittgenstein's manuscripts between October 1929 and March 1930 and demonstrate, first, that Wittgenstein completely rejects the assumption that probability statements are based on an a priori principle. Second, I argue that the standard interpretation, which claims that Wittgenstein adopts an 'epistemological view' of probability, significantly understates the importance of Wittgenstein's development of the notion of hypotheses as a philosophical term of art. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Novel ideas often experience resistance from incumbent forces. While evidence of the bias against novelty has been widely identified in science, there is still a lack of large‐scale quantitative work to study this problem occurring in the prepublication process of manuscripts. This paper examines the association between manuscript novelty and handling time of publication based on 778,345 articles in 1,159 journals indexed by PubMed. Measuring the novelty as the extent to which manuscripts disrupt existing knowledge, we found systematic evidence that higher novelty is associated with longer handling time. Matching and fixed‐effect models were adopted to confirm the statistical significance of this pattern. Moreover, submissions from prestigious authors and institutions have the advantage of shorter handling time, but this advantage is diminishing as manuscript novelty increases. In addition, we found longer handling time is negatively related to the impact of manuscripts, while the relationships between novelty and 3‐ and 5‐year citations are U‐shape. This study expands the existing knowledge of the novelty bias by examining its existence in the prepublication process of manuscripts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers a perspective on the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on publishing in nutrition and dietetics. The author discusses the importance of originality of research papers and their value in terms of formulating critical knowledge and evidence base. Factors influencing editor behavior and decision for accepting research for publication include novelty and timeliness of manuscripts, originality of findings, ethics and integrity, methodological quality and quality of abstracts and title.

The article presents an announcement from the British Association of Critical Care Nurses (BACCN) inviting clinical experts to submit clinically focused papers to the journal "Nursing in Critical Care."

The article calls for clinical experts to submit clinically focused papers to the British Association of Critical Care Nurses' (BACCN) journal "Nursing in Critical Care."

The article calls for clinically focused papers to be published in the journal.

The article lists the reviewers of manuscripts received by the journal "Molecular Ecology" between December 1, 2004 to November 30, 2005.

A fourth call for papers by the Minnesota Chapter of American Fisheries Society (AFS) for the 142nd Annual Meeting of the AFS in 2012 in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, with the theme "Fisheries Networks: Building Ecological, Social and Professional Relationship," is presented.

The article presents an invitation for open-dated submission of paleontological papers for review based on the editorial guidelines and policies in order to facilitate the publication of scientific achievements to the English edition of the journal "Acta Geologica Sinica."

Writing manuscripts collaboratively affords both opportunities and challenges: Collaborative papers can benefit from the expertise, perspectives, and collective effort of the group but can lack coherence or be produced inefficiently. When collaborations are large, involving tens or hundreds of researchers, there are more and different opportunities and challenges, like appropriately crediting the contributions of many people. This paper is a practical guide for authors writing collaborative manuscripts, particularly those working in large collaborations. We emphasize the importance of deliberate leadership and describe five general strategies that lead authors can employ to maximize opportunities and navigate challenges: care in recruiting the author team, care in crediting the author team, clear and frequent communication, organized materials, and deliberate and early decision‐making. For each, we offer specific tips in line with these strategies (e.g., use collaboration agreements, leverage Open Science practices). We then suggest how lead authors can structure the writing and revising process to produce a coherent manuscript and offer tips for submitting papers and responding to peer‐reviews. A repository of resources for people writing manuscripts in collaborations is available at osf.io/dzwcn. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this manuscript is to share the work of a collaboration between professional development providers and university faculty as they created, implemented and refined a professional development series focused on supporting primary teachers' use of data‐based decision making in reading. Using a formative and design‐based approach, multiple sources of informal, formative data were collected (surveys, memos and teacher feedback). Data analysis led the team to make refinements to the professional development in response to three broad challenges experienced during Year 1 of implementation. Key refinements made to the professional development series included (1) breaking down the data‐based decision making (DBDM) process in reading into more tangible, explicit components (e.g., identifying appropriate assessments, organising and analysing data, using data to target instruction); (2) creating materials tailored specifically to support teachers' knowledge and skills in the DBDM process; and (3) identifying external affordances or barriers to teacher implementation of DBDM (e.g., access to high quality reading assessments and/or intervention materials, communication cycles with other teachers/providers). Challenges experienced and refinements made in this study may provide a framework for thinking about how to support primary teachers to use DBDM in reading and may help administrators understand and reflect on systems‐wide factors that may play a role in supporting or hindering teacher enactment of and confidence related to DBDM. Highlights: What is already known about this topicData‐based decision making (DBDM) is a key practice and process for identifying struggling readers and intervening early.Although research has identified positive outcomes associated with DBDM, generally speaking, concerns about assessment 'illiteracy' among practicing teachers abound.Targeted professional development can help teachers build general data and assessment literacy skills and knowledge related to DBDM. What this paper addsConceptual models of DBDM have been reported but are general in design with few focused on DBDM in reading.In this collaborative research project, we used a formative and design‐based approach to explore the creation, implementation and refinement of a professional development series aimed at building teachers' capacity for DBDM.Three key refinements were made to the professional development in response to challenges experienced during first year of implementation at both the micro‐level (i.e., support teachers' knowledge and skills in the DBDM process) and macro‐level (i.e., access to high quality reading assessments and/or intervention materials, communication cycles with other teachers/providers) of DBDM in reading. Implications for theory, policy or practiceExamination of the refinements made in response to challenges that emerged from this collaborative research project at both the micro‐level (teacher/classroom) and macro‐level (school systems) may help (1) inform schools as they formulate instructional frameworks for identifying struggling readers and intervening early; (2) provide professional learning providers with a framework for assessing and addressing primary (K‐5) teacher knowledge and capacity related to DBDM in reading; and (3) provide a basis for future explorations of professional learning opportunities aimed at building and bridging teacher knowledge of and skill related to DBDM in reading. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To identify key research questions where answers could improve care for older people living with diabetes (PLWD), and provide detailed recommendations for researchers and research funders on how best to address them. Methods: A series of online research workshops were conducted, bringing together a range of PLWD and an acknowledged group of academic and clinical experts in their diabetes care to identify areas for future research. Throughout the pre‐workshop phase, during each workshop, and in manuscript preparation and editing, PLWD played an active and dynamic role in discussions as part of both an iterative and narrative process. Results: The following key questions in this field were identified, and research recommendations for each were developed: How can we improve our understanding of the characteristics of older people living with diabetes (PLWD) and their outcomes, and can this deliver better person‐centred care?How are services to care for older PLWD currently delivered, both for their diabetes and other conditions? How can we optimise and streamline the process and ensure everyone gets the best care, tailored to their individual needs?What tools might be used to evaluate the level of understanding of diabetes in the older population amongst non‐specialist Healthcare Professionals (HCPs)?How can virtual experts or centres most effectively provide access to specialist multi‐disciplinary team (MDT) expertise for older PLWD and the HCPs caring for them?Is a combination of exercise and a nutrition‐dense, high protein diet effective in the prevention of the adverse effects of type 2 diabetes and deterioration in frailty, and how might this be delivered in a way which is acceptable to people with type 2 diabetes?How might we best use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in older people and, for those who require support, how should the data be shared?How can older PLWD be better empowered to manage their diabetes in their own home, particularly when living with additional long‐term conditions?What are the benefits of models of peer support for older PLWD, both when living independently and when in care? Conclusions: This paper outlines recommendations supported by PLWD through which new research could improve their diabetes care and calls on the research community and funders to address them in future research programmes and strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the call of the journal "Acta Geologica Sinica" (English Edition) for open-dated submission of paleontological papers and presents concrete requirements for manuscript submission.

The article presents an invitation for manuscript submission for review based on the editorial guidelines and policies in order to facilitate the publication of scientific achievements to the English edition of the journal "Acta Geologica Sinica."

The article focuses on invite for submission of review articles on issues in the field of addiction psychiatry. Topics discussed include reviews will provide systematic synthesis of evidence based practices, reviews on topics such as medical marijuana laws, increase in use of bath salts and neuroimaging studies are encouraged, review articles will follow journal required formatting for manuscripts submissions and will submitted through online submitting systems.

The article announces call for papers for upcoming themed issue on Maternal Health. It states that authors of original research papers addressing methodologic and substantive issues related to severe maternal morbidity and maternal mortality are invited to submit manuscripts for consideration with topics of interest including methods for case ascertainment of maternal deaths in low-, middle-and high-income countries; maternal morbidity and epidemiologic priorities.

Purpose: The confidence in a study will be reduced due to the incorrect representation of statistical results. However, it is unknown to what extent p values are incorrectly represented in published nursing journals. The study aims to evaluate the articles in 30 nursing journals in terms of the error in reporting of p values (p =.000). Design and Methods: This was a bibliometric analysis. All papers published in 10 leading nursing journals (between 2015 and 2019), the 10 bottom nursing journals (2019), and 10 selected key nursing journals (2019) indexed in the Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports were reviewed to detect errors in reporting of p values (p =.000). Results: A total of 3,788 papers were reviewed. Notably, it was found that 93.3% (28/30) of the nursing journals contained incorrect representation of p values (p =.000). The reporting rate of these journals ranges from 0% to 57.1%, with an overall rate of 12.8% (486/3,788). In addition, the rate of incorrect representation of p values (p =.000) showed no statistically significant difference between different publication years (Χ2 = 4.976, p =.290). However, the rate of reporting was different between study types, journals, and regions (p =.007, p =.020, and p <.001, respectively). Conclusions: The incorrect representation of p values is common in nursing journals. Clinical Relevance: We recommend that both publishers and researchers be responsible for preventing statistical errors in manuscripts. Furthermore, various kinds of statistical training methods should be adopted to ensure that nurses and journal reviewers have enough statistical literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's comments on the publication of the journal. The author says that many manuscripts accepted for publication in the journal could not be published due to the paucity of space as well as the limited novel findings. The Journal receives about 650 manuscripts per year, but the journal can accommodate only 110 pages.

The article presents guidelines for manuscript submission to the academic journal "Acta Geological Sinica" (English Edition).

Manuscripts are a crucial form of evidence for research into all aspects of premodern European history and culture, and there are numerous databases devoted to describing them in detail. This descriptive information, however, is typically available only in separate data silos based on incompatible data models and user interfaces. As a result, it has been difficult to study manuscripts comprehensively across these various platforms. To address this challenge, a team of manuscript scholars and computer scientists worked to create "Mapping Manuscript Migrations" (MMM), a semantic portal, and a Linked Open Data service. MMM stands as a successful proof of concept for integrating distinct manuscript datasets into a shared platform for research and discovery with the potential for future expansion. This paper will discuss the major products of the MMM project: a unified data model, a repeatable data transformation pipeline, a Linked Open Data knowledge graph, and a Semantic Web portal. It will also examine the crucial importance of an iterative process of multidisciplinary collaboration embedded throughout the project, enabling humanities researchers to shape the development of a digital platform and tools, while also enabling the same researchers to ask more sophisticated and comprehensive research questions of the aggregated data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the ways of reviewing manuscripts from the perspective of the reviewers. Topics discussed include explaining researchers about how to pursue their own research and collecting data for manuscripts, providing guidance and suggestions to the researchers, and scope for improvement and recommended revision after the judgments and peer review of writing.