Search

Several factors influence the citation impact. This paper constructed paths from funding to citation impact on a country basis. Country data came from Incites® (2011-2020). The (2013 to 2018) UNESCO database was used to define investments in Research and Development (R&D). An overall analysis and analyses by clusters formed by investments in R&D were carried out. Countries that invest relatively less in R&D tend to have less investment by businesses and publish fewer documents. Some differences exist in this pattern. For example, countries in the lowest investment group show higher international collaboration and publications in Open Access Journals. This leads to a higher impact but below countries with the highest investments in R&D. The paths from funding to high impact differed by cluster. While international collaboration appeared in several clusters, the % of papers in Q1 (Top) journal quartile, based on citations, was in almost all clusters. More investments in R&D and open access publishing do not necessarily lead to high impact.

The notable increase in retraction papers has attracted considerable attention from diverse stakeholders. Various sources are now offering information related to research integrity, including concerns voiced on social media, disclosed lists of paper mills, and retraction notices accessible through journal websites. However, despite the availability of such resources, there remains a lack of a unified platform to consolidate this information, thereby hindering efficient searching and cross-referencing. Thus, it is imperative to develop a comprehensive platform for retracted papers and related concerns. This article aims to introduce "Amend," a platform designed to integrate information on research integrity from diverse sources. The Amend platform consolidates concerns and lists of problematic articles sourced from social media platforms (e.g., PubPeer, For Better Science), retraction notices from journal websites, and citation databases (e.g., Web of Science, CrossRef). Moreover, Amend includes investigation and punishment announcements released by administrative agencies (e.g., NSFC, MOE, MOST, CAS). Each related paper is marked and can be traced back to its information source via a provided link. Furthermore, the Amend database incorporates various attributes of retracted articles, including citation topics, funding details, open access status, and more. The reasons for retraction are identified and classified as either academic misconduct or honest errors, with detailed subcategories provided for further clarity. Within the Amend platform, a total of 32,515 retracted papers indexed in SCI, SSCI, and ESCI between 1980 and 2023 were identified. Of these, 26,620 (81.87%) were associated with academic misconduct. The retraction rate stands at 6.64 per 10,000 articles. Notably, the retraction rate for non-gold open access articles significantly differs from that for gold open access articles, with this disparity progressively widening over the years. Furthermore, the reasons for retractions have shifted from traditional individual behaviors like falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, and duplication to more organized large-scale fraudulent practices, including Paper Mills, Fake Peer-review, and Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC). The Amend platform may not fully capture all retracted and concerning papers, thereby impacting its comprehensiveness. Additionally, inaccuracies in retraction notices may lead to errors in tagged reasons. Amend provides an integrated platform for stakeholders to enhance monitoring, analysis, and research on academic misconduct issues. Ultimately, the Amend database can contribute to upholding scientific integrity. This study introduces a globally integrated platform for retracted and concerning papers, along with a preliminary analysis of the evolutionary trends in retracted papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), like many other research funders, requires its grantees to make papers available via open access (OA). This article investigates the effect of publishing in OA journals and international collaboration within and between European and sub-Saharan African countries on citation impact and likelihood of falling into the top 1% and top 10% most cited papers in poverty-related disease (PRD) research., Methods: Disease-specific research publications were identified in the Web of Science™ and MEDLINE using Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. Data on the open accessibility of scientific literature were derived from 1science oaFindr. Publication data, including relative citation counts, were extracted for 2003-2015. Regression models were applied to quantify the relationship between relative citations and presence in the 1% and top 10% most cited papers versus OA and international collaboration., Results: The results show that since 2003 papers on PRDs have become increasingly available in OA. Among all PRD areas, malaria research is most frequently published in OA and in international collaboration. The adjusted regression analyses show that holding other factors constant, publishing research in OA and in international collaboration has a significant and meaningful citation advantage over non-OA or non-international collaborative research. Publishing papers as part of a European-wide or European- sub-Saharan African collaboration increases research impact. In contrast, such collaboration advantage is not observed for research output involving sub-Saharan Africa only which seems to decrease research impact., Conclusions: Our results indicate that there is a real, measurable citation advantage for publishing PRD research in OA and international collaboration. However, the international collaboration advantage seems to be region-specific with increased research impact for European-wide and European-sub-Saharan African collaborations but a decrease in research impact of collaborations confined to sub-Saharan African research institutions. Further research is required to further verify this finding and to understand the underlying factors related to this observed decrease in research impact. To target future research capacity building activities in sub-Saharan Africa it is important to assess whether the observed decreased impact reflects the scientific competencies and geographic distribution of individual researchers or institutional-, national- or funder-specific research requirements., Competing Interests: JGB and MMM have no competing interests to declare. CT, GR, MD and DBS have the following interests to declare: CT, GR, MD and DBS are employed by Science-Metrix. Financial support was provided by Science-Metrix for the manuscript preparation (over and above the contracted study) in the form of salaries for CT, GR, MD and DBS. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

The primary objective of this paper was to provide insights into papers that garnered significant attention in news outlets. A sample of seventy academic papers, each with over 500 mentions in news outlets, was chosen for this study via Dimensions. Comprehensive data for each paper was extracted from diverse sources, encompassing the Journal Citation Report (JCR), Scopus, SCImago, Altmetric.com, as well as analyses of the titles and abstracts. Findings concerning the characteristics of these papers revealed that those highly referenced in news outlets tend to be predominantly published in open access within prestigious specialized journals, with a primary focus on medical and health-related topics. The majority of these papers have been published within the last three years, with each accumulating more than 100 citations in Scopus. Additionally, the results indicated that the number of authors and international collaboration does not exert a substantial influence on the frequency of news posts dedicated to highly mentioned papers in news outlets. However, the journal's impact factor, paper citation count, and the alignment of the paper's affiliation country with that of the news outlets displayed a notable correlation with the frequency of news posts pertaining to these papers. Based on the study's findings, it can be inferred that science journalists place higher emphasis on considerations such as proximity, prestige, timeliness, and relevance in their coverage, prioritizing these factors over other news values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main aim of this work is to provide insight into a bibliometric analysis of Data Journals and Data Papers in terms of research areas, disciplines, publication year and country. In particular, we calculated many bibliometric indicators, especially: the number of publications and citations. Furthermore, this work also investigated the top 20 journals in which scientists published the largest number of Data Papers. It was found that the first Data Paper in Medical and Health Science was published in 2006. Our results indicate that about 64% of Data Papers are cited and about 30% of Data Papers are articles that have international co-authors. We also found that a significant number of Data Papers were published in top quartile (Q1) Open Access journals. Furthermore, most Data Papers were published in Multidisciplinary Sciences, followed by Biological Sciences, Earth and related Environmental Sciences as well as Computer and Information Sciences. Our analyses show that the largest number of Data Papers were published in journals with an Impact Factor ranging from 5 to 6. Additionally, the largest number of Data Papers were published in the USA, China, the United Kingdom, Italy and France. From the point of view of scientists, this work is needed because scientists can check information about journals in which they may publish research data. Moreover, they can find Data Journals with a high Impact Factor and MEiN points. This analysis is also interesting because scientists/publishers can compare the disciplines and countries in which researchers have published the greatest number of Data Papers. Finally, it is worth noting that this work gives insights into the various bibliometric indicators related to citations and the number of publications. This information can be useful for people associated with bibliometric analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The repository of the Faculty of Chemistry, University of Belgrade, and the Innovation Center – Cherry presents a well-organized digital library of the institution’s scientific outputs. For the purpose of this paper a research was done on the change in the number of citations contained in the repository, based on data from the external application Authors, projects, publications. The application has integrated parameters for examining the number of citations from Scopus and Web of Science databases. In this paper the change in number of citations from publications which appear in Altmetric – a platform for alternative metric were also used. Two methods of research were applied: the first method examines the change in number of citations for all deposited records of publications in the repository, and the second method enables to examine the change in number of citations on the level of all records of a specific author. The author whose publications were examined for the research via the second method was pronounced the most cited author in the yearly report for 2021 of the Faculty of Chemistry. Both methods examine three types of records with varying levels of accessibility: permanetly restricted, available after an embargo period (green open access) and permanent open access (gold open access). The metadata of all three kinds of publications recorded in the Cherry repository are accessible to the public with strict control of the librarian – repository manager. The research subject of this paper notes the difference that arises in the number of citations of individual records in September 2021 and a year later, in September 2022. The aim of the paper is to present a possible method to establish a correlation between the accessibility of publications and their citation count. There is a special regard to publications in the green open access, which form the basis for monitoring the relevance of the repository to the Faculty of Chemistry, University of Belgrade, and the Innovation Center as well as to other institutions which are parts of the established infrastructure of repositories in Serbia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the increasing pressure to publish in high-impact scientific journals and the unethical publication practices that have emerged as a result. These practices include redundant publications, plagiarism, and data fabrication. The article also highlights the profit motives of stakeholders, such as open access publishers charging high article processing charges. The emergence of artificial intelligence is predicted to further complicate the situation, with AI-generated papers flooding the journals. The author suggests that the solution to this academic mess is the "demonetization" of scientific journals, prioritizing teaching over research in academic institutions. [Extracted from the article]

Background and aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the general patterns of scientific productions, impact factor and open access publishing of international researchers and compare them between males and females. Material and methods: This scientometric and webometric, from a variety of survey methods, investigated the status of male and female scientific productions and the status of open access and non-open access papers in the web in the field of nanosience and nanotechnology (N&N) using comparative approach. Research population consisted of all female and male international researchers in the field of N&N, contributing three or less than three papers from 2007 to 2009. Findings: The results showed that there was no significant difference between female and male international researchers in terms of the mean of the open access papers and impact factor. However, there was significant difference between the frequency of male and female researchers in favor of men. Conclusion: Gender has no effect on open access publishing, visibility, and increasing citation and impact factor.

Objectives: Information professionals have supported medical providers, administrators and decision-makers, and guideline creators in the COVID-19 response. Searching COVID-19 literature presented new challenges, including the volume and heterogeneity of literature and the proliferation of new information sources, and exposed existing issues in metadata and publishing. An expert panel developed best practices, including recommendations, elaborations, and examples, for searching during public health emergencies. Methods: Project directors and advisors developed core elements from experience and literature. Experts, identified by affiliation with evidence synthesis groups, COVID-19 search experience, and nomination, responded to an online survey to reach consensus on core elements. Expert participants provided written responses to guiding questions. A synthesis of responses provided the foundation for focus group discussions. A writing group then drafted the best practices into a statement. Experts reviewed the statement prior to dissemination. Results: Twelve information professionals contributed to best practice recommendations on six elements: core resources, search strategies, publication types, transparency and reproducibility, collaboration, and conducting research. Underlying principles across recommendations include timeliness, openness, balance, preparedness, and responsiveness. Conclusions: The authors and experts anticipate the recommendations for searching for evidence during public health emergencies will help information specialists, librarians, evidence synthesis groups, researchers, and decision-makers respond to future public health emergencies, including but not limited to disease outbreaks. The recommendations complement existing guidance by addressing concerns specific to emergency response. The statement is intended as a living document. Future revisions should solicit input from a broader community and reflect conclusions of meta-research on COVID-19 and health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The December 2023 cover paper of the Journal of Materials Science features a study by Xie and Luo from Chongqing Jiaotong University in China. The paper, included in the "Computation & Theory" Topical Collection, focuses on the use of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) for construction projects. The authors aim to provide insights into the transport behavior of liquids in epoxy-modified C–S–H pores in cement-based materials, combining MD simulations with experimental measurements. Xie is currently pursuing a master's degree in civil engineering, while Prof. Luo is an associate professor at Chongqing Jiaotong University and a researcher at Aarhus University in Denmark, with a focus on reducing the carbon and energy footprint of civil engineering materials and infrastructure. The paper is published open access and can be widely shared with readers using the provided link. [Extracted from the article]

Methods in Ecology & Evolution (MEE) has undergone several changes since the author became the executive editor. These changes include a new team of senior editors and an editorial board, the transition to a gold open-access journal, the requirement for data and code to be included with submissions, and the implementation of double-blind review. Despite these changes, the core mission of the journal remains the same: to promote the development of new methods in ecology and evolution. The journal has a high impact factor and receives a large number of submissions each year, but only a small percentage are accepted. The best submissions are focused on methodology rather than results, and the journal offers different article types to accommodate different types of research. The author encourages potential authors to reach out for guidance on whether their manuscript is a good fit for the journal. [Extracted from the article]

This paper explores the effect of publishing a data paper in the Open Access journal Data in Brief (DIB) on the citation counts of the related research paper. Using regression analysis, citation content analysis and a survey method, we investigate whether research papers with a related data paper have higher citation counts and the potential reasons. After controlling variables that correlate with the citation counts, research papers with a related data paper were found to have higher citation counts than those published in the same issue of the same journal. Next, we explored the causal relationship between the two variables by surveying the corresponding authors of 618 papers who shared datasets in DIB from 2014 to 2021. The results show that the authors acknowledge the benefits of sharing data in DIB, including citation increase and career reputation enhancement. We further explored how the data papers in DIB increase the citations of the related research papers by using citation content analysis. We found that scientists co‐cite the data papers and their related research papers for the purpose of reusing the underlying data or portraying a better understanding of the underlying data and related research articles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper introduces CORE, a widely used scholarly service, which provides access to the world's largest collection of open access research publications, acquired from a global network of repositories and journals. CORE was created with the goal of enabling text and data mining of scientific literature and thus supporting scientific discovery, but it is now used in a wide range of use cases within higher education, industry, not-for-profit organisations, as well as by the general public. Through the provided services, CORE powers innovative use cases, such as plagiarism detection, in market-leading third-party organisations. CORE has played a pivotal role in the global move towards universal open access by making scientific knowledge more easily and freely discoverable. In this paper, we describe CORE's continuously growing dataset and the motivation behind its creation, present the challenges associated with systematically gathering research papers from thousands of data providers worldwide at scale, and introduce the novel solutions that were developed to overcome these challenges. The paper then provides an in-depth discussion of the services and tools built on top of the aggregated data and finally examines several use cases that have leveraged the CORE dataset and services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author offers insights on post-publication issues on original medical research papers in 2021. Topics discussed include replies to received letters to the editor on the published manuscript, the basis of a publication's prestige on a highly rated indexed journal like MEDLINE, and the website posting of the published article in portable document format (PDF). Also noted are the factors of journal and personal research impacts.

The demand for reproducible research is on the rise in disciplines concerned with data analysis and computational methods. Therefore, we reviewed current recommendations for reproducible research and translated them into criteria for assessing the reproducibility of articles in the field of geographic information science (GIScience). Using this criteria, we assessed a sample of GIScience studies from the Association of Geographic Information Laboratories in Europe (AGILE) conference series, and we collected feedback about the assessment from the study authors. Results from the author feedback indicate that although authors support the concept of performing reproducible research, the incentives for doing this in practice are too small. Therefore, we propose concrete actions for individual researchers and the GIScience conference series to improve transparency and reproducibility. For example, to support researchers in producing reproducible work, the GIScience conference series could offer awards and paper badges, provide author guidelines for computational research, and publish articles in Open Access formats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 1990s, journals have become increasingly online and open access. In fact, about 50% of articles published in 2021 were open access. The use of preprints (i.e., non-peer-reviewed articles) has also increased. However, there is limited awareness of these concepts among academics. Therefore, we conducted a questionnaire-based survey among members of the Molecular Biology Society of Japan. The survey was conducted between September 2022 and October 2022, with 633 respondents, 500 of whom (79.0%) were faculty members. In total, 478 (76.6%) respondents had published articles as open access, and 571 (91.5%) wanted to publish their articles in open access. Although 540 (86.5%) respondents knew about preprints, only 183 (33.9%) had posted preprints before. In the open-ended section of the questionnaire survey, several comments were made about the cost burdens associated with open access and the difficulty of how academic preprints are handled. Although open access is widespread, and recognition of preprints is increasing, some issues remain that need to be addressed. Academic and institutional support, and transformative agreement may help reduce the cost burden. Guidelines for handling preprints in academia are also important for responding to changes in the research environment., (© 2023 Molecular Biology Society of Japan and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objective - To investigate the citation performance of open access (OA) and toll access (TA) papers published in author-pays open access journals. Design - Longitudinal citation analysis. Setting - Publications in Springer and Elsevier's author-pays open access journals. Subjects - 633 journals published using the author-pays model. This model encompasses both journals where the article processing charge (APC) is required and journals in which authors can request open access and voluntarily pay APCs for accepted manuscripts. Methods - The authors identified APC funded journals (journals funded by mandatory author processing charges as well as those where authors voluntarily paid a fee in order to have their articles openly accessible) from both Springer and Elsevier, and analyzed papers published in these journals from 2007 to 2011. The authors excluded journals that adopted the APC model later than 2007. To identify Springer titles, the authors created a search strategy to identify open access articles in SpringerLink. A total of 576 journals were identified and double checked in the Sherpa- Romeo database (a database of copyright and open access self-archiving policies of academic In order to identify the Elsevier APC funded journals, the authors referred to "Open Access Journal Directory: A-Z," which contained 35 OA journals (p. 584). Once the authors consulted "Sponsored articles" issued by Elsevier and verified titles in Sherpa-Romeo, they identified 57 journals that fit the "authorpays" model. The bibliographic information was downloaded and OA articles were separated from TA articles. The authors confirmed that all journals were indeed OA publications by downloading the full-text from off-campus locations; they also verified that the journals were using the APC model by visiting each journal's website. Because of the large number of subject areas of the identified journals, the researchers decided to classify the journals into four broader categories: Health Sciences, Life Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences and Humanities. To calculate the impact of OA papers, citation per paper (CPP) was calculated for each subject area. Impact values were calculated on an annual basis as well. The researchers calculated the citation advantage of OA articles as the "difference between the open access and toll access impacts in terms of a percentage of the latter" (p. 585). Main Results - The authors categorized their findings according to three themes: the growth of APC funded OA papers, the number of OA papers by discipline, and citation advantage of OA vs. TA in general and by subject area. Together, Springer and Elsevier published 18,654 OA papers in the APC journals; this number represents 4.7% of the 396,760 papers published between 2007 and 2011. While the number of OA and TA papers has been growing annually, the number of OA papers has been growing more rapidly compared to the TA papers. In terms of subject areas, Life Sciences had the largest number of OA and TA papers (184,315), followed by Health Sciences (149,341), Natural Sciences (121,274), and Social Sciences and Humanities (42,824). Natural Sciences had the most OA papers (5.7%) in terms of the number of papers in this subject area being OA papers, followed by Social Sciences and Humanities (5.2%), Health Sciences (4.6%) and Life Sciences (3.6%). Overall, the researchers found that the impact values of OA papers were larger than those of the TA papers for each year examined. In considering subject areas, in all disciplines except Life Sciences, the most highly cited paper in the field is an OA paper. In Life Sciences, the most highly cited TA paper had 2,215 citations, compared to the OA paper, which had 1,501 citations. Even though the TA paper had more citations, overall, the OA papers had a higher impact (citation advantage). In Health Sciences, the most highly cited OA paper received 1,501 citations, which is 1.2 times the most highly cited TA paper, with 1,252 citations. The citation advantage for the OA group is 33.29% higher than the TA group. In Natural Sciences, the number of citations from the highest cited OA paper is 1,736, or 2.52 times higher than the most highly cited TA paper. The OA papers in this discipline had a 35.95% citation advantage. In Social Sciences and Humanities, the most highly cited OA paper had 681 citations, compared to the TA paper, with 432 citations. For this subject area, the citation impact of the OA paper is 3.14% higher than the TA paper. Conclusions - In sum, the number of article processing charge funded open access papers has grown tremendously in recent years. Furthermore, open access papers have a citation advantage over toll access papers, both annually and across disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This case study analyses data on papers of Croatian authors published in 2017 from four Web of Science Core Collection citation indexes (SCI‐EXP, SSCI, AHCI, and ESCI). The primary dataset (5,176 articles and reviews) was divided into two subsets, the open access (OA) subset (2,964 papers) and non‐OA subset (2,212 papers). We also used the primary dataset to create a subset of papers published in Croatian journals (1,588) as opposed to foreign ones. All were screened for full‐text OA status, journal JCR quartile ranking, journal dominant discipline, and language of publication. OA papers prevailed with 74.4%. Most were available at publisher websites. The percentage of OA papers in Croatian journals was 99.8%. The share of OA papers was the highest in the humanities and social sciences, which also saw the highest share of papers in the Croatian language. Key points: Three quarters of papers published by Croatian authors are available in open access (OA).Most papers are in English, even in Croatian journals; Croatian prevailed only in the humanities.Croatian journals are mostly non‐commercial, and many receive government subsidies, provided they are OA; they generally do not charge for article processing.The prevalence of OA over non‐OA papers is the highest in the humanities, followed by the social sciences.Open access publishing might increase international visibility of journals from periphery or semi‐periphery countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The April 2024 issue of the Journal of Materials Science features a cover paper titled "Self-assembled NIPAM-PEG-NIPAM polymeric nanomicelles for the delivery of zinc protoporphyrin: a potential stimuli-triggered cancer treatment approach" by Bagheri-Meyabad et al. The paper, which is part of the "Materials for Life Sciences" Topical Collection, explores the use of nanomicelles for drug delivery. The corresponding author, Professor Rassoul Dinarvand, is based in Iran and has a strong research background in materials for life sciences. The paper is freely available online and includes supplementary information. [Extracted from the article]

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to assess gender differences in the productivity, impact, collaboration pattern and author position of dentistry and oral sciences researchers in Nigeria.MethodsWe examined the Web of Science (WoS) publication records of dentistry and oral sciences researchers to assess gender differences in productivity, impact, collaboration and authorship pattern (first authorship, last authorship and corresponding author). The analysis included the number of publications in journals ranked based on their quartile rating amongst the journals in the subject area (Q1–Q4). Chi square was used to make gender comparisons. Significance was set at >5%.Results413 unique authors published 1,222 articles on dentistry and oral sciences between 2012 and 2021. The number of WoS documents per female author was significantly higher than that per male author (3.7 vs. 2.6, p = 0.03). A non-significantly higher percentage of females authored papers in Q2 and Q3 journals and a higher percentage of males authored papers in Q4 journals. The number of citations per female author (25.0 vs. 14.9, p = 0.04) and the percentage of females listed as first authors (26.6% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.048) were statistically greater than men. The percentage of males listed as last authors was statistically greater than females (23.6% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.04). The correlation between the percentage of papers with researchers listed as first authors and that listed as last authors was not significant for males (p = 0.06) but was significant for females (p = 0.002). A non-significantly greater percentage of females were listed as corresponding authors (26.4% vs. 20.6%) and males were listed as international (27.4% vs. 25.1%) and domestic collaborators (46.8% vs. 44.7%). Also, there was no statistically significant gender difference in the proportion of articles published in open access journals (52.5% vs. 52.0%).ConclusionThough there were significant gender differences in the productivity, impact, and collaboration profile of dentistry and oral sciences researchers in Nigeria, the higher female research productivity and impact may be driven by cultural gender nuances that needs to be explored further.

An editorial is presented which discusses the collaborative writing with multiple authors which has additional challenges including varied levels of engagement of coauthors, provision of fair credit through authorship or acknowledgements and acceptance of diversity of work styles. Also discussed are the 10 simple rules for collaboratively writing a multi-authored paper which include to build a writing team wisely; to create a data management plan and to jointly decide on authorship guidelines.

In an article published in this journal entitled "Predatory publications in the era of internet and technology: Open access publications are at risk", Akhilesh Kumar, Ravi Gupta, Krishna Kant Tripathi & Rajani Ranjan Singh argue that the definition of predatory publications defame the open access journals putting the sustainability of these type of publications at risk which mushroomed in the age of internet and electronic freedom in disseminating academic and non-academic information. This note comments on their paper by arguing that (a) predatory practices are ubiquitous in the academic world, not only in publications; (b) charging a fee does not make an academic practice predatory; and (c) in the long-term no publication or an academic practice can survive if it does not offer some sort of "satisfaction" to users (readers and authors). The argument of peer review or not is irrelevant because a publication, once it becomes available, is constantly reviewed by its readers who are the ultimate judges of its quality. At the end of the day, what counts are the number of readers and the number of citations of a published work. Thanks to the internet these are now easily measurable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We attempt to find out whether OA or TA really affects the dissemination of scientific discoveries. We design the indicators, hot-degree, and R-index to indicate a topic OA or TA advantages. First, according to the OA classification of the Web of Science (WoS), we collect data from the WoS by downloading OA and TA articles, letters, and reviews published in Nature and Science during 2010–2019. These papers are divided into three broad disciplines, namely biomedicine, physics, and others. Then, taking a discipline in a journal and using the classical Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to cluster 100 topics of OA and TA papers respectively, we apply the Pearson correlation coefficient to match the topics of OA and TA, and calculate the hot-degree and R-index of every OA-TA topic pair. Finally, characteristics of the discipline can be presented. In qualitative comparison, we choose some high-quality papers which belong to Nature remarkable papers or Science breakthroughs, and analyze the relations between OA/TA and citation numbers. The result shows that OA hot-degree in biomedicine is significantly greater than that of TA, but significantly less than that of TA in physics. Based on the R-index, it is found that OA advantages exist in biomedicine and TA advantages do in physics. Therefore, the dissemination of average scientific discoveries in all fields is not necessarily affected by OA or TA. However, OA promotes the spread of important scientific discoveries in high-quality papers. We lost some citations by ignoring other open sources such as arXiv and bioArxiv. Another limitation came from that Nature employs some strong measures for access-promoting subscription-based articles, on which the boundary between OA and TA became fuzzy. It is useful to select hot topics in a set of publications by the hot-degree index. The finding comprehensively reflects the differences of OA and TA in different disciplines, which is a useful reference when researchers choose the publishing way as OA or TA. We propose a new method, including two indicators, to explore and measure OA or TA advantages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The present study explored tendencies of the world’s countries— at individual and scientific development levels—toward publishing in APC-funded open access journals. Design/Methodology/Approach: Using a bibliometric method, it studied OA and NOA articles issued in Springer and Elsevier’s APC journals during 2007–2011. The data were gathered using a wide number of sources including Sherpa/Romeo, Springer Author-mapper, Science Direct, Google, and journals’ websites. Findings: The Netherlands, Norway, and Poland ranked highest in terms of their OA shares. This can be attributed to the financial resources allocated to publication in general, and publishing in OA journals in particular, by the countries. All developed countries and a large number of scientifically lagging and developing nations were found to publish OA articles in the APC journals. The OA papers have been exponentially growing across all the countries’ scientific groups annually. Although the advanced nations published the lion’s share of the OA-APC papers and exhibited the highest growth, the underdeveloped groups have been displaying high OA growth rates. Practical Implications: Given the reliance of the APC model on authors’ affluence and motivation, its affordability and sustainability have been challenged. This communication helps understand how countries at different scientific development and thus wealth levels contribute to the model. Originality/Value: This is the first study conducted at macro level clarifying countries’ contribution to the APC model—at individual and scientificdevelopment levels—as the ultimate result of the interaction between authors’ willingness, the model affordability, and publishers and funding agencies’ support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the procedure for submission of a research paper in the fields of electrical and electronics engineering.

Evaluation of researchers' output is vital for hiring committees and funding bodies, and it is usually measured via their scientific productivity, citations, or a combined metric such as the h-index. Assessing young researchers is more critical because it takes a while to get citations and increment of h-index. Hence, predicting the h-index can help to discover the researchers' scientific impact. In addition, identifying the influential factors to predict the scientific impact is helpful for researchers and their organizations seeking solutions to improve it. This study investigates the effect of the author, paper/venue-specific features on the future h-index. For this purpose, we used a machine learning approach to predict the h-index and feature analysis techniques to advance the understanding of feature impact. Utilizing the bibliometric data in Scopus, we defined and extracted two main groups of features. The first relates to prior scientific impact, and we name it 'prior impact-based features' and includes the number of publications, received citations, and h-index. The second group is 'non-prior impact-based features' and contains the features related to author, co-authorship, paper, and venue characteristics. We explored their importance in predicting researchers' h-index in three career phases. Also, we examined the temporal dimension of predicting performance for different feature categories to find out which features are more reliable for long- and short-term prediction. We referred to the gender of the authors to examine the role of this author's characteristics in the prediction task. Our findings showed that gender has a very slight effect in predicting the h-index. Although the results demonstrate better performance for the models containing prior impact-based features for all researchers' groups in the near future, we found that non-prior impact-based features are more robust predictors for younger scholars in the long term. Also, prior impact-based features lose their power to predict more than other features in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acknowledgements represent scholars' relationships as part of the research contribution. While co-authors and citations are often provided as a well-formatted bibliometric database, acknowledged individuals are difficult to identify because they appear as part of the statements in the paper. We identify acknowledged scholars who appeared in papers published in open-access journals by referring to the co-author and citation relationships stored in the Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG). Therefore, the constructed dataset is compatible with MAG, which accelerates and expands the acknowledgements as a data source of scholarly relationships similar to collaboration and citation analysis. Moreover, the implemented code is publicly available; thus, it can be applied in other studies. Measurement(s) acknowledgements section • acknowledged scholar Technology Type(s) natural language processing • social network analysis [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented which discusses reports on archives, open access publishing, and access to information.

Physiological Reports, a Gold Open Access journal, is celebrating its 10th anniversary. The journal was established in 2013 and has since grown in scope and reputation. It publishes sound science in basic and translational physiology, with a focus on global outreach and diverse research topics. The journal has achieved high citation rates and has expanded its publication activities, including the addition of Methods articles and targeted Calls for Papers. To celebrate its anniversary, the journal will introduce a "Paper of the Year" award and a "Short Review" writing competition for early-career researchers. The journal aims to continue its success and development in the future by engaging with authors, readers, and reviewers. [Extracted from the article]

Open access publication rates have been steadily increasing over time. In spite of this growth, academics in low income settings struggle to gain access to the full canon of research literature. While the vast majority of open access repositories and funding organizations with open access policies are based in high income countries, the geographic patterns of open access publication itself are not well characterized. In this study, we developed a computational approach to better understand the topical and geographical landscape of open access publications in the biomedical research literature. Surprisingly, we found a strong negative correlation between country per capita income and the percentage of open access publication. Open access publication rates were particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa, but vastly lower in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and East Asia and the Pacific. These effects persisted when considering papers only bearing authors from within each region and income group. However, papers resulting from international collaborations did have a higher percentage of OA than single-country papers, and inter-regional collaboration increased OA publication for all world regions. There was no clear relationship between the number of open access policies in a region and the percentage of open access publications in that region. To understand the distribution of open access across topics of biomedical research, we examined keywords that were most enriched and depleted in open access papers. Keywords related to genomics, computational biology, animal models, and infectious disease were enriched in open access publications, while keywords related to the environment, nursing, and surgery were depleted in open access publications. This work identifies geographic regions and fields of research that could be priority areas for open access advocacy. The finding that open access publication rates are highest in sub-Saharan Africa and low income countries suggests that factors other than open access policy strongly influence authors’ decisions to make their work openly accessible. The high proportion of OA resulting from international collaborations indicates yet another benefit of collaborative research. Certain applied fields of medical research, notably nursing, surgery, and environmental fields, appear to have a greater proportion of fee-for-access publications, which presumably creates barriers that prevent researchers and practitioners in low income settings from accessing the literature in those fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on Procedure for Submitting a Paper, presenting Directly Submitted Papers at an IAS-Sponsored Conference, and Review Process of the periodical.

The article provides information on the bimonthly publication "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Transactions on Industry Application" of interest to authors including topics of paper to be submitted, procedure for submitting a paper, and copyright policy of the IEEE.

The author-pays model (open access publishing funded through author charges) is dependent on authors having access to financial support at the time their research papers are accepted. We conducted an author survey to determine the availability of external funding for publication charges at different points in the research process. Of the 377/524 (72%) who responded, 62% (233/377) received external funding to support their study, but with notable differences between journals. Only 25% (95/377) could withdraw funds from a grant at the time of paper acceptance. The grant was closed at this time for almost half (105/233.45%) of those who were externally funded. Non-externally funded research was largely supported through departmental resources (56%, 80/144) or carrying out research in own time (63%, 91/144). To conclude, a large proportion of published research is not externally funded, and many funded researchers do not have access to financial support at the time their paper is accepted for publication. INSET: Box 1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Twitter has become an important promotional tool for scholarly work, but individual academic publications have varied degrees of visibility on the platform. We explain this variation through the concept of Twitter-worthiness: factors making certain academic publications more likely to be visible on Twitter. Using publications from communication studies as our analytical case, we conduct statistical analyses of 32187 articles spanning 82 journals. Findings show that publications from G12 countries, covering social media topics and published open access tend to be mentioned more on Twitter. Similar to prior studies, this study demonstrates that Twitter mentions are associated with peer citations. Nevertheless, Twitter also has the potential to reinforce pre-existing disparities between communication research communities, especially between researchers from developed and less-developed regions. Open access, however, does not reinforce such disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have emerged as a promising technology for enhancing communication between the human brain and external devices. Electroencephalography (EEG) is particularly promising in this regard because it has high temporal resolution and can be easily worn on the head in everyday life. However, motion artifacts caused by muscle activity, fasciculation, cable swings, or magnetic induction pose significant challenges in real-world BCI applications. In this paper, we present a systematic review of methods for motion artifact reduction in online BCI experiments. Using the PRISMA filter method, we conducted a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, focusing on open access publications from 1966 to 2022. We evaluated 2,333 publications based on predefined filtering rules to identify existing methods and pipelines for motion artifact reduction in EEG data. We present a lookup table of all papers that passed the defined filters, all used methods, and pipelines and compare their overall performance and suitability for online BCI experiments. We summarize suitable methods, algorithms, and concepts for motion artifact reduction in online BCI applications, highlight potential research gaps, and discuss existing community consensus. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of the field and guide researchers in selecting appropriate methods for motion artifact reduction in online BCI experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of online journals and academic platforms are adopting light peer review or 'publish then filter' models of scholarly communication. These approaches have the advantage of enabling instant exchanges of knowledge between academics and are part of a wider search for alternatives to traditional peer review and certification processes in scholarly publishing. However, establishing credibility and identifying the correct balance between communication and scholarly rigour remains an important challenge for digital communication platforms targeting academic communities. This paper looks at a highly influential, government-backed, open publishing platform in China: Science Paper Online, which is using transparent post-publication peer-review processes to encourage innovation and address systemic problems in China's traditional academic publishing system. There can be little doubt that the Chinese academic publishing landscape differs in important ways from counterparts in the United States and Western Europe. However, this article suggests that developments in China also provide important lessons about the potential of digital technology and government policy to facilitate a large-scale shift towards more open and networked models of scholarly communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses and measures the effect of the peer review process on research citations and to compare the research impact of refereed and working papers. One hundred one research articles published in "Information Research: An International Electronic Journal," from the years 1998-2002 were used. The related literature on the topic of the peer review process is explored. Citation statistics are given of the research publications, of refereed papers, and of working papers. It was found that the process of peer review has a significant effect on the research impact of articles regarding the number of citations.

The study evaluates the research performance of top-six NIRF ranked engineering institutions in Karnataka. The study uses scientometrics indicators like publication and citation growth, AGR, RGR, DT, citation productivity of open access publications, and document types. The analysis revealed that publication productivity increased after the introduction of NIRF in 2016. The average citations of all the institutions increased, and MS Ramaiah Institute of Technology (MSRIT) recorded the highest 1.7 citations per paper, followed by Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU) with 1.69 citations per paper. The decreasing trend of relative growth and increased doubling time reveal that the institutes are reaching their saturation point in their publication productivity. The open-access articles' average citations are higher than non-OA articles. The Rashtreeya Vidyalaya College of Engineering (RVCE) open access articles received the highest citations, 11.8 average citations--nearly four times higher than closed access articles, with 2.58 average citations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report on the completed first volume of Vegetation Classification and Survey (VCS), which included ten Research Papers, six Short Database Reports, two Long Database Reports, two Forum Papers and one Report. We highlight three outstanding papers as examples of contributions of which we would like to see more in the future. Finally, we announce a new article type "VCS Methods" and report about the status of two upcoming Special Collections. Lists of colleagues who served as reviewers or linguistic editors in 2020 are included in appendices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemistry Teacher International (CTI) is an open-access journal that focuses on publishing good practice reports in chemistry teaching. It was initiated by Jan Apotheker and launched in June 2019. The journal aims to bridge the gap between research and education, provide a platform for IUPAC and EuChemS activities in education, and build an international journal not tied to a specific area or nation. CTI collaborates with various organizations, such as the European Chemical Society and the Federation of Asian Chemical Societies, to support chemistry education worldwide. Since its inception, CTI has grown significantly, publishing papers from authors in 33 different countries. It has been indexed in key databases and has an Impact Factor of 1.5. The journal expresses gratitude to its editors, reviewers, readers, and authors for their contributions and support. Due to the increase in submissions, the number of Associate Editors and the formation of an Editorial Advisory Board will be implemented in the future. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses a European Commission position paper published in February 2007 on scientific information in the digital age. The paper calls for better access to online scientific information in digital form and preservation of research results for future generations. The European Union supports the Open Access initiative and has budgeted € 25 million for research into the maintenance of digital contents.