Search

Objective: To conduct a time-cost analysis of formatting in scientific publishing. Design: International, cross-sectional study (one-time survey). Setting: Internet-based self-report survey, live between September 2018 and January 2019. Participants: Anyone working in research, science, or academia and who submitted at least one peer-reviewed manuscript for consideration for publication in 2017. Completed surveys were available for 372 participants from 41 countries (60% of respondents were from Canada). Main outcome measure: Time (hours) and cost (wage per hour x time) associated with formatting a research paper for publication in a peer-reviewed academic journal. Results: The median annual income category was US$61,000–80,999, and the median number of publications formatted per year was four. Manuscripts required a median of two attempts before they were accepted for publication. The median formatting time was 14 hours per manuscript, or 52 hours per person, per year. This resulted in a median calculated cost of US$477 per manuscript or US$1,908 per person, per year. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyze the cost of manuscript formatting in scientific publishing. Our results suggest that scientific formatting represents a loss of 52 hours, costing the equivalent of US$1,908 per researcher per year. These results identify the hidden and pernicious price associated with scientific publishing and provide evidence to advocate for the elimination of strict formatting guidelines, at least prior to acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To conduct a systematic review of studies of social media platforms used by young people to discuss and view deliberate self-harm. Study Design: 11 electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to January 2012 for primary research; in June 2014 an updated search of Medline was conducted. Grey literature sources were also searched. Search results were screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by another. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results: Due to heterogeneity in study objectives and outcomes, results were not pooled; a narrative analysis is presented. 26 studies were included. Most were conducted in Canada or the UK (30.8% each), used qualitative designs (42.3%), and evaluated discussion forums (73.1%). Participants were most often aged 19–21 years (69.2%), female (mean 68.6%), and 19.2% had a documented history of depression. The social media platforms evaluated were commonly supportive and provided a sense of community among users. Support included suggestions for formal treatment, advice on stopping self-harming behavior, and encouragement. Harms included normalizing and accepting self-harming behavior; discussion of motivation or triggers, concealment, suicidal ideation or plans; and live depictions of self-harm acts. Conclusions: Although this evidence is limited by its descriptive nature, studies identify beneficial and detrimental effects for young people using social media to discuss and view deliberate self-harm. The connections users make online may be valuable to explore for therapeutic benefit. Prospective, longitudinal investigations are needed to identify short- and long-term potential harms associated with use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hospitals and health care systems have become a major target for hackers. In September, the computer systems of three Ontario hospitals were crippled by a ransomware virus, an attack in which hackers encrypt data and demand payment to unlock it. Although the attack did not lead to any patient information leaving the hospital's system, nor any payment to the hackers, the effect on hospital operations was severe. [Extracted from the article]