Search

To evidence the existence of a gender gap in the orthopedic scientific literature by including also differences between some specific orthopedic surgery specialities, such as hands and feet. Then, we also considered gender role in the Authorship linked with the economic wealth of each country belonging to each Author. The gender of the first Authors of journals on orthopedics and sports medicine indexing in the Scopus database with the highest impact factor (IF) related to the year 2019, for the period from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, were considered. A total of 11 journals were considered, including a total of 5474 articles, 1087 (19.86%) had a woman as the first Author and 4387 (80.14%) a man. During the studied period, the trend seems to be the same (p = 0.906): Men were significantly more producing than women in the orthopedic field both by considering the topic of the journal (p =.003), all the most impacted orthopedic journals (p < 0.001) and economies (p < 0.001). There was therefore a strong significance: In the orthopedic field, there were significantly more male researchers who presented their first name in scientific publications compared to females in all orthopedic subspecialties. The economically poorer countries published less and the role of women became almost absent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern research often involves the collection or analysis of data and the use of specialized computer algorithms. Traditional text articles thus provide only partial documentation of a research study. Readers have limited ability to reproduce or utilize work if the source data are not available or if it relies on an algorithm that is described, but code is not provided. Fortunately, a wide variety of tools are now available to support the publication of research data and code. The effort required to publish data is now relatively small, and the benefits can be immense. This opinion article discusses trends toward increased sharing in academic publishing. It describes opportunities and resources to support data and code sharing and describes the benefits for both authors and readers. Finally, it discusses how Earthquake Spectra is providing resources and enhancing its policies to establish the sharing of data as the default procedure when publishing in the journal, and encourage the sharing of code and other resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing popularity of the Bayesian approach in Psychology has prompted metascientific efforts to quantify its prevalence. However, despite enduring debates between proponents of Frequentist and Bayesian schools of thought, no systematic comparison of their prominence has been conducted in existing literature. This brief report fills this gap, examining Bayesian and Frequentist trends in the period from 1964 to 2023 through a meticulous search in PsycINFO. The findings reveal that the Frequentist approach has consistently been more popular than the Bayesian approach in the realm of Psychometrics and Statistical Psychology. However, Bayesian contributions steadily increased from the 80's onward and appear to be almost as important or even surpassing the Frequentist counterparts in the latest years investigated (2019–2023). Although this observation applies primarily to specialized literature rather than the entire domain of Psychology, it underscores the growing prevalence of the Bayesian approach, signaling attention among specialists in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing emphasis on research across disciplines, and higher educational institutions' research productivity (RP) is a matter of serious consideration. However, a knowledge gap exists in RP in social science disciplines in India. In this context, the present study aimed to (1) understand the RP of social work and psychology schools at publicly funded central universities (CU) in India, (2) evaluate the RP and research impacts of faculty members in these schools, and (3) identify the publishing trends and patterns in social work and psychology disciplines. Using the Scopus database, we collected bibliometric information on publications of 19 social work and 16 psychology schools and their faculty members. The results indicate that schools' research productivity remained unpromising, constituting many faculty members (Social work 51.08%; Psychology 43.4%) with no publications. Although the average RP of social work (M= 16.0, SD = 17.40) and psychology (M= 45.63, SSD = 61.08) schools differed, the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.88, p = .078). An increase in the publication was evident after 2016, indicating positive-policy impacts. A difference in RP across professional ranks was evident for social work (p\.05) but not for psychology (p>.05). For research impact, a difference existed based on ranks for academicians from psychology only (p\.05). Publications in high-impact journals and an output of international collaborations remained low in both disciplines. Implications point to developing appropriate workshops and training to provide hands-on experience to improve quality research among academicians. Further policy changes are also essential to enhance research culture and productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research presented in this article was aimed to explore knowledge domain related to the application of Bayesian method in psychological research. The analysis was based on metadata from 7.054 Bayesian-related psychological articles published from 1962 till 2023 and indexed in Scopus. Trends in publishing Bayesian-related articles were analyzed for different psychology subfields and estimated by the number of published Bayesian articles and their proportions within the total number of articles for each subfield in each particular year. Main research topics were analyzed using the visualization of keywords co-occurrence, and journal co-citation network. Results revealed general increasing trend in publishing Bayesian-related articles in psychology, but also illustrated differences among the subfields both in the pace of growth and relative diversity of research themes. Cognitive and experimental psychology and neurosciences stand out with a high proportion and steep increase of articles related to Bayesian method. Accordingly, most of the psychological research outside of cognitive psychology that use Bayesian method are also very saturated by topics related to cognitive processes. Statistical and methodological issues are well represented, mainly in the form of discussing Bayesian statistics in psychology as an alternative to classical statistics, but also as a method to promote open science principles, having the potential to overcome replication crisis and improve transparency of psychological research. The content of the more recent papers indicate that Bayesian networks have emerged as a useful method to explore psychopathological phenomena, while Bayesian modelling is becoming popular in developmental and educational psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting (JETA) from 2008 to 2022, the period since its indexing in Web of Science, focusing on authorship patterns, dominant topics, and citation trends. The findings highlight a significant concentration of authorship within JETA, suggesting an opportunity for enhancing diversity and introducing fresh perspectives through expanded authorial engagement. Acknowledging JETA's significant contributions to blockchain, text analysis/NLP, and AI, this study proposes an exploration into broader, interdisciplinary domains to further enrich the journal's thematic diversity, in alignment with global academic trends. The study further recognizes an opportunity for JETA to bolster its global impact by inviting contributions from underrepresented regions, such as South America, Australia, and Africa. Additionally, the analysis reveals a commendable trend in JETA toward collaborative and potentially interdisciplinary research, implying that fostering such collaborations could yield innovative research methodologies in the field. Data Availability: The data supporting the findings of this study can be provided upon request by contacting Batuhan Güvemli. JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M42; M49. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper summarizes the 18th Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) Conference: Berlin Re-Visited: Building Technological Support for Scholarship and Scientific Publishing, held as a hybrid event 10 and 11 January 2023, and organized by the Berlin Institute of Scholarly Publishing (BISP), a not-for-profit organization dedicated to bringing publishers, researchers, funders, and policymakers together. This year's conference theme "Out with the old, in with the new!" was discussed and presented in keynote speeches, the APE lecture, and several panel discussions. Current challenges within scholarly publishing, e.g., with research integrity, trust, and research assessment, have much to do with the old ways of doing things. To move science forward, new technologies and innovations, like the decentralized web, FAIR digital objects, and blockchain technology are needed to shape new paradigms. In many sessions it was stressed that not just new technologies are needed to move science forward, but human collaboration and partnerships as well. The changing role of the journal and the importance to recognize more diverse research outputs, beyond the journal article, was a topic of importance. Not only research assessment reforms and improved collaboration amongst different stakeholder groups are needed to address this, new publishing systems, better metadata, and open infrastructures as well. A session presenting different start-ups showcased how Artificial Intelligence, Natural Language Processing and software technology can be used to tackle problems in e.g., finding relevant funders and peer reviewers, and detecting image plagiarism. It was also discussed what publishers can do to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Collaboration, data transparency and sharing best practices amongst researchers, funders, and policy makers are key. Another important topic during this year's APE was how publishers can support Early Career Researchers: establishing new workflows and infrastructures that enable publication of a wider range of research outputs, and broader recognition of these outputs, will incentivize ECRs. This year's APE was concluded with the APE Award Ceremony. The winner - Vsevolod Solovyov from Prophy - has used AI to enhance the current peer review system and made a very important contribution to improving the scholarly communication system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To explore any changes in the perceived gender and affiliation of first authors of papers published in the British Journal of Orthodontics (BJO) and Journal of Orthodontics (JO), over the last 50 years. Methods: Electronic hand searches of the BJO and JO from 1973 to 2021, were undertaken to identify research and clinical papers published the first volume of the BJO (1973-74) and then the first two volumes of each subsequent decade i.e. 1980-81; 1990-91 to 2020-21. Articles such as Editorials, Product Updates and Abstract summaries, were excluded. The perceived gender of the first author was identified from their forename, internet sources and/or personal knowledge, where possible. The country of the first author's affiliation was identified from the author details stated in the papers. The countries were then grouped into geographical areas. Results: A total of 385 papers were identified with a steady increase from 1973 to 2021. There was a statistically significant increase in papers published by authors who were perceived to be female (odds ratio 8.33; 95% CI 4.75, 14.64). The increase in papers published by non-UK affiliated first authors was significant (odds ratio 5.01; 95% CI 2.78, 9.02). Conclusions: The Journal has seen a significant change, over the last 50 years, in its authorship profile from nearly exclusively male, UK based authors to more than 60% of published papers having a first author who was perceived as being female and 37% originating from outside the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though political science is one of the most extensive research fields within the social sciences, there is little scholarly knowledge about its publishing trends and the internationalization of the discipline. This paper analyzes international publishing by taking a close look at publishers, Scopus-indexed journals, articles, and author collaboration networks. The results show that the number of political science journals almost tripled between 2000 and 2022. Our descriptive analysis also reveals that only a few Western commercial international publishers, and Taylor & Francis in particular, dominate the publication of political science journals, and Western authors account for the majority of both academic papers and citations. Additionally, our research explores that the most prolific country in terms of publication within political science is still the United States, but the BRICS countries, especially India, Russia, and China, have achieved remarkable growth in their publication outputs. Finally, our network analysis suggests that the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia occupy central positions in international collaborations among political scientists, but Asian, Eastern European and Latin-American regional networks have been developing in the last decade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In today's increasingly connected and digitized business environment, brands face numerous challenges that can significantly affect their reputation and value, and one of the key challenges that many organizations across the world face is brand risk. Due to its role in many aspects of business, the main purpose of this paper is to revitalize this phenomenon by exploring it through bibliometric indicators, publishing trends and analyzing it through the current literature. In this sense, the paper adresses two research questions, both related to revealing the scope and nature of brand risk as the construct of a great relevance in many scientific fields, whereas a special attention has been given to the analysis of the most cited papers on this matter. The findings show that the construct although presented two decades ago is still in infancy phase, and quite neglected in the current body of knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study is a diversity audit of play script orders during FY2011 and FY2019 to determine if University of California, Irvine Libraries’ orders had shifted to reflect the increased demand for diverse playwrights. The audit also examined the larger publishing landscape for play scripts during these specific years to determine if plays by diverse playwrights were being published and available for acquisition. The audit demonstrates that both the play script orders and publishing landscape have greatly diversified; however, further work needs to be done to continue diversifying local acquisitions with what is being published, so that library collections of play scripts reflect the university and country’s demographics.

Abstract Background Studies reporting statistically significant effect estimates tend to be more frequently published compared to studies reporting non-significant or equivalent estimates. Consequently, this may lead to distortion of the literature. The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of reporting statistically significant effect estimates in leading oral health journals and to explore associations between the effect estimates and record characteristics. Methods An electronic database search was undertaken of a selection of leading oral health journals including general oral health journals to identify primary oral health records published in 2019. Descriptive statistics and population average GEE logistic regression model was used to assess associations between articles reporting a statistically significant effect estimate and the record characteristics. Results In 1335 records, 82.4% records reported a statistically significant effect estimate. All speciality journals compared to general oral health journals were less likely to publish a record with significant effect estimates. Authors based in Asia or other (OR 1.49; 95% CI :1.02,2.19; p = 0.037) were more likely to report significant effect estimates compared to those based in Europe. Interventional (OR 0.35; 0.22,0.58; p

The Diverse BookFinder is a free online resource that provides data about thousands of picture books published since 2002 depicting Black and Indigenous people and People of Color. Using this data, this study looks at the publishing trends from 2015 to 2020 in terms of race/culture and unique categories developed by the Diverse BookFinder that identify how people in these books are depicted. This study found an increasing trend to publish books with illustrations of characters that are racially ambiguous, with no race or culture specified in the text (the Diverse BookFinder tags these characters as "Brown-Skinned and/or Race Unspecified"). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open access models for academic publishing offer an alternative to traditional subscription-based journals. In the open access model, the author generally retains the copyright and the published articles are available free on the internet. Publication costs are either borne by the author as article processing charges, or are free for some journals published by societies or institutions. Traditional subscription-based journals are funded by subscription costs to libraries and individuals, the publisher retains the copyright, and these journals are generally not freely available to the public. This traditional model has created two problems: (1) many for-profit publishers control access in a form of oligopoly and impose high costs to subscribers; and (2) it limits access of scientific information to the public which disproportionately affects poorly funded research institutions and developing countries. Other subscription-based journals are published by scientific and professional societies but are not "for-profit". In the forest sciences, several open access journals emerged in the last 10-15 years. These open access journals are published by for-profit publishing companies, research institutions, and professional societies. Some of these journals have been successful at attracting manuscript submissions, becoming indexed by various indexation services, and have seen metrics representing their importance increase over time. This paper documents these trends and assesses the viability of the open access model in the forest sciences and compares them to other types of journals.

Open access models for academic publishing offer an alternative to traditional subscription-based journals. In the open access model, the author generally retains the copyright and the published articles are available free on the internet. Publication costs are either borne by the author as article processing charges, or are free for some journals published by societies or institutions. Traditional subscription-based journals are funded by subscription costs to libraries and individuals, the publisher retains the copyright, and these journals are generally not freely available to the public. This traditional model has created two problems: (1) many for-profit publishers control access in a form of oligopoly and impose high costs to subscribers; and (2) it limits access of scientific information to the public which disproportionately affects poorly funded research institutions and developing countries. Other subscription-based journals are published by scientific and professional societies but are not "for-profit". In the forest sciences, several open access journals emerged in the last 10-15 years. These open access journals are published by for-profit publishing companies, research institutions, and professional societies. Some of these journals have been successful at attracting manuscript submissions, becoming indexed by various indexation services, and have seen metrics representing their importance increase over time. This paper documents these trends and assesses the viability of the open access model in the forest sciences and compares them to other types of journals.

Background: Studies reporting statistically significant effect estimates tend to be more frequently published compared to studies reporting non-significant or equivalent estimates. Consequently, this may lead to distortion of the literature. The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of reporting statistically significant effect estimates in leading oral health journals and to explore associations between the effect estimates and record characteristics. Methods: An electronic database search was undertaken of a selection of leading oral health journals including general oral health journals to identify primary oral health records published in 2019. Descriptive statistics and population average GEE logistic regression model was used to assess associations between articles reporting a statistically significant effect estimate and the record characteristics. Results: In 1335 records, 82.4% records reported a statistically significant effect estimate. All speciality journals compared to general oral health journals were less likely to publish a record with significant effect estimates. Authors based in Asia or other (OR 1.49; 95% CI :1.02,2.19; p = 0.037) were more likely to report significant effect estimates compared to those based in Europe. Interventional (OR 0.35; 0.22,0.58; p < 0.001) and observational (OR 0.56; 0.36, 0.89; p = 0.013) records were less likely to report significant effect estimates compared to in-vitro studies. Registered records were less likely to report significant effect estimates when compared to non-registered studies (OR 0.22; 95% CI :0.14,0.32; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The publishing of records with significant effect estimates is prevalent within the oral health literature. To reduce dissemination bias and overestimation of effect sizes in systematic reviews, the publishing of studies with non-significant or equivalent effect estimates should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: COVID-19 changed scholarly publishing. Yet, its impact on medical education publishing is unstudied. Because journal articles and their corresponding publication timelines can influence academic success, the field needs updated publication timelines to set evidence-based expectations for academic productivity. This study attempts to answer the following research questions: did publication timelines significantly change around the time of COVID-19 and, if so, how?, Methods: We conducted a bibliometric study; our sample included articles published between January 2018, and December 2022, that appeared in the Medical Education Journals List-24 (MEJ-24). We clustered articles into three time-based groups (pre-COVID, COVID-overlap, and COVID-endemic), and two subject-based groups (about COVID-19 and not about COVID-19). We downloaded each article's metadata from the National Library of Medicine and analyzed data using descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and post-hoc tests to compare mean time differences across groups., Results: Overall, time to publish averaged 300.8 days ( SD = 200.8). One-way between-groups ANOVA showed significant differences between the three time-based groups F (2, 7473) = 2150.7, p < .001. The post-hoc comparisons indicated that COVID-overlap articles took significantly longer ( n = 1470, M = 539; SD = 210.6) as compared to pre-COVID ( n = 1281; M = 302; SD = 172.5) and COVID-endemic articles ( n = 4725; M = 226; SD = 136.5). Notably, COVID-endemic articles were published in significantly less time than pre-pandemic articles, p < .001., Discussion: Longer publication time was most pronounced for COVID-overlap articles. Publication timelines for COVID-endemic articles have shortened. Future research should explore how the shift in publication timelines has shaped medical education scholarship., Competing Interests: Lauren A. Maggio is Deputy Editor in Chief for Perspectives on Medical Education. She was removed from all editorial processes relating to the handling of this submission. The authors have no additional competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s).)

Introduction: For authors, selecting a target journal to submit a manuscript is a critical decision with career implications. In the discipline of medical education, research conducted in 2016 found that authors were influenced by multiple factors such as a journal's prestige and its mission. However, since this research was conducted the publishing landscape has shifted to include a broader variety of journals, an increased threat of predatory journals, and new publishing models. This study updates and expands upon how medical education authors decide which journal to submit to with the aim of describing the motivational factors and journal characteristics that guide authors' decision making., Methods: The authors conducted five qualitative focus groups in which twenty-two medical education authors and editors participated. During the focus groups participants were engaged in a discussion about how they select a journal to submit their manuscripts. Audio from all focus groups was transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using codebook thematic analysis., Results: Participants considered multiple factors when selecting a target journal. Factors included a journal's impact, the scope of a journal, journal quality, and technical factors (e.g., word limits). Participants also described how social factors influenced their process and that open access plays a role that could both encourage or deter submission., Discussion: The findings describe the motivational factors and influential signals that guide authors in their journal selection decision making. These findings confirm, extend, and update journal selection factors reported in medical education and other disciplines. Notably, these findings emphasize the role of social factors, relationships and personal experiences, which were absent from previous work. Additionally, we observed increased consideration of open acces and a shift away from an emphasis on journal prestige., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared.

The purpose of the present study was to analyze Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly (APAQ) publications over the journal's fourth decade (2014-2023) and compare them with previous documentary analyses of the first 3 decades. Consistent with prior documentary analyses, publications were coded and analyzed based on the use of theory, research participants, topic, whether the study was an intervention, first-author country affiliation, and research method. The total number of published research papers increased substantially (n = 61) from the third to the fourth decade. Similar to prior documentary analyses, most of the research was quantitative (n = 140; 57.5%), followed by qualitative research (n = 96; 39.5%). There were far more qualitative-research publications in the fourth decade compared with the third decade (n = 34). This may reflect the continued acceptance and growth of qualitative research compared with 10-20 years ago. It may also reflect the value of rich in-depth exploratory research using small samples. Additional trends included more review papers and meta-analyses, possibly reflecting the increased knowledge base in particular areas requiring synthesis. The diversity of topics also increased, with papers on dignity, classification, coaching, and the Paralympics playing more prominent roles. The number of international publications also grew substantially. In brief, the current paper outlines both similarities and differences in APAQ's published research over the 4 decades of its existence.

Introduction: The sharing of research findings through communications at congresses and publications is essential for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. The aim was to determine the percentage of communications presented the biennial meetings of the Sociedad Española de Neonatología (SENeo, Spanish Society of Neonatology) eventually published as full-text articles in indexed peer-reviewed journals and their bibliometric characteristics., Material and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study by reviewing the abstracts from the oral communications (OCs) in the 2017, 2019 and 2021 SENeo congresses. Then we searched for the authors in the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. We collected data on the authors, type of OC and bibliometric characteristics., Results: The sample included 525 OCs, and we found a publication rate of 40.38% corresponding to 212 publications, 78.8% of them in international journals. The most frequent journal of publication was Anales de Pediatría. The median and interquartile range values for the impact factor, quartile and number of citations were 2.86 (1.96-3.98), 2 (1-3) and 3 (0-7), respectively, with a remarkable increase in the impact factor for the most recent congresses. The median time elapsed to publication was 10 months (IQR, 1-23). The proportion published was higher for multicentre studies and those with a respiratory topic., Conclusions: The frequency of publication for OCs submitted to SENeo congresses was similar to the frequency of publication for other paediatric congresses, with an impact factor that was above the mean of the congresses under study. The proportion of publication was higher for studies with a multicentre design or a respiratory topic., (Copyright © 2024 Asociación Española de Pediatría. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: A preprint is a version of a research manuscript posted to a preprint server prior to peer review. Preprints enable authors to quickly and openly share research, afford opportunities for expedient feedback, and enable immediate listing of research on grant and promotion applications. In medical education, most journals welcome preprints, which suggests that preprints play a role in the field's discourse. Yet, little is known about medical education preprints, including author characteristics, preprint use, and ultimate publication status. This study provides an overview of preprints in medical education to better understand their role in the field's discourse., Method: The authors queried medRxiv, a preprint repository, to identify preprints categorized as "medical education" and downloaded related metadata. CrossRef was queried to gather information on preprints later published in journals. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: Between 2019 and 2022, 204 preprints were classified in medRxiv as "medical education," with most deposited in 2021 (n = 76; 37.3%). On average, preprint full-texts were downloaded 1,875.2 times, and all were promoted on social media. Preprints were authored, on average, by 5.9 authors. Corresponding authors were based in 41 countries, with 45.6% in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Almost half (n = 101; 49.5%) became published articles in predominantly peer-reviewed journals. Preprints appeared in 65 peer-reviewed journals, with BMC Medical Education (n = 9; 8.9%) most represented., Conclusions: Medical education research is being deposited as preprints, which are promoted, heavily accessed, and subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals, including medical education journals. Considering the benefits of preprints and the slowness of medical education publishing, it is likely that preprint depositing will increase and preprints will be integrated into the field's discourse. The authors propose next steps to facilitate responsible and effective creation and use of preprints., (Copyright © 2024 Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the U.S. Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.)

Objectives: To describe the characteristics and publication outcomes of clinical prediction model studies registered on clinicaltrials.gov since 2000., Study Design and Setting: Observational studies registered on clinicaltrials.gov between January 1, 2000, and March 2, 2022, describing the development of a new clinical prediction model or the validation of an existing model for predicting individual-level prognostic or diagnostic risk were analyzed. Eligible clinicaltrials.gov records were classified by modeling study type (development, validation) and the model outcome being predicted (prognostic, diagnostic). Recorded characteristics included study status, sample size information, Medical Subject Headings, and plans to share individual participant data. Publication outcomes were analyzed by linking National Clinical Trial numbers for eligible records with PubMed abstracts., Results: Nine hundred twenty-eight records were analyzed from a possible 89,896 observational study records. Publications searches found 170 matching peer-reviewed publications for 137 clinicaltrials.gov records. The estimated proportion of records with 1 or more matching publications after accounting for time since study start was 2.8% at 2 years (95% CI: 1.7%, 3.9%), 12.3% at 5 years (9.8% to 14.9%) and 27% at 10 years (23% to 33%). Stratifying records by study start year indicated that publication proportions improved over time. Records tended to prioritize the development of new prediction models over the validation of existing models (76%; 704/928 vs. 24%; 182/928). At the time of download, 27% of records were marked as complete, 35% were still recruiting, and 14.7% had unknown status. Only 7.4% of records stated plans to share individual participant data., Conclusion: Published clinical prediction model studies are only a fraction of overall research efforts, with many studies planned but not completed or published. Improving the uptake of study preregistration and follow-up will increase the visibility of planned research. Introducing additional registry features and guidance may improve the identification of clinical prediction model studies posted to clinical registries., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest G.C. was supported by Cancer Research UK (programme grant: C49297/A27294). There are no competing interests for any other author., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: This article explored the publication impact of evidence-based healthcare terminology to determine usage and discuss options for low usage terms., Background: A plethora of terms describe the scholarship of evidence-based healthcare. Several terms are synonyms, creating redundancy and confusion. The abundance and overlap of terms may impede the discovery of evidence., Design: This discursive article explored and discussed publication impact of evidence-based healthcare terms., Methods: Evidence-based healthcare terms were identified, and their 10-year (2013-2022) publication impact was assessed in the CINAHL and Medline databases. A card sort method was also used to identify terms with low usage., Results: A total of 18/32 terms were included in the review. The terms evidence-based practice, quality improvement, research and translational research were the most highly published terms. Publication data were presented yearly over a 10-year period. Most terms increased in publication use over time, except for three terms whose use decreased. Several terms related to translational research have multiple synonyms. It remains unknown whether these terms are interchangeable and possibly redundant, or if there are nuanced differences between terms., Conclusion: We suggest a follow-up review in 3-5 years to identify publication trends to assess context and terms with continued low publication usage. Terms with persistent low usage should be considered for retirement in the reporting of scholarly activities. Additionally, terms with increasing publication trends should be treated as emerging terms that contribute to evidence-based healthcare terminology., Implications for Nursing: Confusion about the use of appropriate terminology may hinder progress in the scholarship of evidence-based healthcare. We encourage scholars to be aware of publication impact as it relates to the use of specific terminology and be purposeful in the selection of terms used in scholarly projects and publications., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None to report.

Objective: Research experience is one criterion of the selection process for applicants to residency training programs. We aim to quantify temporal trends in research productivity of medical students who matched into a canadian ophthalmology residency program., Design: Retrospective database review., Participants: A total of 465 residents commencing ophthalmology training from 2010 to 2022 in 15 Canadian ophthalmology residency programs., Methods: The names of all residents commencing training in ophthalmology in all Canadian programs from 2010 to 2022 were identified. Bibliometric data including publication count and type, authorship position, and H-index corresponding to the match year were extracted from the Scopus database. Descriptive and univariate statistics were used to characterize and assess trends in research productivity., Results: A total of 461 ophthalmology residents (99% complete data set) from all 15 residency programs representing 1179 publications, including 679 ophthalmology-related publications, were identified. Most publications were original research (676; 58%), followed by case reports and letters (324; 27%) and reviews (162; 14%). Overall, 62% of residents had at least 1 publication at the time of the match, with a mean of 2.56 ± 3.49 publications and a mean H-index of 1.03 ± 1.48 publications. There was a significant increase (p < 0.001) in all research productivity metrics except senior authorship in the period 2019-2022 compared with 2010-2018. Notably, 91% of residents had ≥1 publication in 2022 compared with 38% in 2010., Conclusion: First-year ophthalmology resident publication productivity doubled from 2010-2016 to 2017-2022 suggesting a greater emphasis on scholarly work from medical trainees, a trend similar to that reported in other specialties., Competing Interests: Footnotes and Disclosure The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article., (Copyright © 2023 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This paper summarizes the 17th Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) Conference: The Future of the Permanent Record, held online from 11 until 13 January, 2022, and organized by the Berlin Institute of Scholarly Publishing (BISP), a not-for-profit organization dedicated to bringing publishers, researchers, funders and policymakers together. The conference consisted of keynote speeches, presentations, and panel discussions on a variety of scholarly communication topics. Main themes were the value of the Version of Record and how to preserve quality and trust in the scholarly record. Collaboration across all stakeholders and high-quality metadata are key, especially when looking at the future where a “record of versions” could exist, connecting all research outputs. Other conference topics involved the threat of paper mills, research integrity and the importance of digital preservation. To ensure trustworthy and high-quality publications, knowledge exchange and cooperation are crucial. Effective partnerships and a multi-perspective approach are key in fostering inclusion, diversity and equity in scholarly communication too. Several speakers stressed the important role publishers play in moving towards an inclusive and trusted Open Science ecosystem, in which data sharing is accelerated and quality assurance and control are implemented across the entire research cycle. To achieve this, new ways of working and new business models need to be developed, and entrepreneurship and innovation encouraged. The 17th APE ended with a session in which five startups showcased their innovative products to advance science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Romance novels are a billion-dollar industry within book publishing, but do these stories have diverse representation that reflect reality? This paper examines the diversity of race, sexuality, neurodivergence, disability, and fat representation in traditionally published romance novels in the USA. Various authors and titles are discussed, including a comparison between traditional publishing and self-publishing. While there has been an improvement in diverse representation in adult romance novels, there is still a large gap in the titles publishing houses are acquiring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The analyses of publishing trends are gaining importance across various disciplines, yet we have limited knowledge on the extent to which international publication processes have developed within the field of legal studies. Based on bibliometric and network analyses focusing on the past two decades, our research investigates publishing and internationalization processes in the pool of Scopus-indexed law journals, as well as the publication patterns of the most prolific Law scholars. Results indicate that most legal studies journals are concentrated in the hands of a few global publishers and university presses, and, while the number of Scopus-indexed law journals are high, the level of internationalization is relatively low. Consequently, further efforts are prompted to enhance geographical diversity and increase the level of international collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The packaging of a book – its peritextual materials including front cover, blurb, acknowledgements, afterword, and author notes – provides information that can contribute to a potential reader’s decision whether or not to purchase, borrow, or read the story it encases. As such, the choices made by authors, illustrators, editors, and publishers regarding books’ peritextual features can offer important insights into the spaces books are intended to occupy within their contemporary market. This article examines the peritextual materials of a broad range of Anglo-American transgender young adult novels published in the twenty-first century, in the context of the We Need Diverse Books movement and Time’s “transgender tipping point” which coincided in the mid-2010s. In doing so, it shows how the field of transgender young adult fiction has developed over the last five or so years to include more variety, intersectional diversity, and Own Voices authorship, as well as considering how the commercial packaging of various books might usefully signal the audience each is intended to attract. While a growing area of scholarship, existing research on transgender young adult novels has predominantly focused on the stories or their pedagogical function for teenage readers. Taking a different approach, this article asks how a selection of transgender young adult titles are pitched to potential readers and examines the way they signal that transgender characters or themes are included in their narratives in order to ascertain the types of audiences these books are intended to attract. It then considers how peritextual features are used to construct authorial identities, bringing readers’ attention to authors’ various knowledge, expertise, and relevant experience to write transgender characters. By examining a broad selection of peritexts, this article makes the case that transgender young adult novels are often marketed to cisgender readers at the expense of transgender and questioning adolescents who are seeking reflections of their lived experiences.

Background: While other otolaryngology subspecialties have established female authorship trends, there is no comprehensive study within head and neck surgery (HNS)., Methods: Five researchers recorded the gender identity of first and senior authors from HNS subspecialty papers (head and neck oncology, endocrine surgery, salivary gland pathology, and microsurgery) derived from 10 journals in otolaryngology and oncology in the years 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2022., Results: From 3457 articles, 6901 unique author identities were analyzed. Female authors represented 32% (N = 1103) of first authors and 20% (N = 690) of senior authors. Female authors were less likely to publish in microvascular and reconstructive surgery. Senior female authors were more likely to publish in higher impact journals than male senior authors, and first female authors had an increased likelihood of funding compared to their male counterparts., Conclusions: While female authors remain underrepresented in certain literature, we illustrate promising trends in productivity, funding allocation, and impact., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Research data management is an umbrella term used to describe activities related to the creation, organisation, structuring, naming, backing up, storage, conservation, and sharing of research data as well as all actions that guarantee security of research data. As is often the case, researchers from Sub-Saharan Africa are lagging behind their counterparts in developed countries in embracing the best practices of research data management. One of the factors to which this slow pace of adoption of research data management could be attributed, is inadequate research on the subject. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the quantity, quality, visibility and authorship of publications on research data management in Sub-Saharan Africa. Bibliometrics approaches were used to analyse publications on research data management from, and on, Sub-Saharan Africa which are currently indexed in Google Scholar. The index was chosen because it is free and is reputed to have liberal selection criteria which do not favour, or discriminate, any discipline or geographic regions. Data was retrieved from Google Scholar using Harzing’s “Publish or Perish” software and analysed using VOSviewer. The findings of the study revealed that the quantity, quality, visibility and authorship collaboration of scholarly publications on research data management in Sub-Saharan Africa is low. The findings may be used by libraries and research institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa to develop and promote best practices in research data management as a means of enhancing their research output and impact.

Objective: to analyze the profile of scientific production on nursing technology construction, validity and application., Methods: this is a bibliometric study, carried out in six databases, based on the Methodi Ordinatio application, arranged in nine stages. To represent the findings, the VOSviewer® software was used., Results: 346 studies were identified, obtained from BDENF, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science. There was a predominance of the English language, and 20% of the authors hold more than 25% of studies. Only two journals account for 25% of studies in the period studied. Twenty-six studies were selected for the InOrdinatio classification. Nursing Process (23%) stood out among the studies. The most produced technology was software (27%), and 50% of works describe construction and validity., Conclusions: there is an emphasis on the creation of educational technologies, especially information technology. The data demonstrates opportunities for future research in the area.

This study examines the influence of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding on the publication choices of dermatologists, particularly in terms of journal tiers and pay-to-publish (P2P) versus free-to-publish (F2P) models. Utilizing k-means clustering for journal ranking based on SCImago Journal Rank, h-index, and Impact Factor, journals were categorized into three tiers and 54,530 dermatology publications from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Authors were classified as Top NIH Funded or Non-Top NIH Funded according to Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research rankings. The study finds significant differences in publication patterns, with Top NIH Funded researchers in Tier I journals demonstrating a balanced use of P2P and F2P models, while they preferred F2P models in Tier II and III journals. Non-Top NIH Funded authors, however, opted for P2P models more frequently across all tiers. These data suggest NIH funding allows researchers greater flexibility to publish in higher-tier journals despite publication fees, while prioritizing F2P models in lower-tier journals. Such a pattern indicates that funding status plays a critical role in strategic publication decisions, potentially impacting research visibility and subsequent funding. The study's dermatology focus limits broader applicability, warranting further research to explore additional factors like geographic location, author gender, and research design., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: To evaluate the scientific production on university social responsibility (USR) from institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted on documents published in indexed journals in the Scopus database from its inception until April 2023. Eligible documents included those on USR describing experiences carried out by universities in Latin America and the Caribbean. The number of articles per author, average authors per article, average citations per article, and the number of documents with one or more author were described. Bibliometric indicators regarding authors per article, co-authors per article, and institutional collaboration were presented. Bibliometric networks were constructed based on bibliographic coupling analysis of documents by countries and term co-occurrence in titles and abstracts. Results: Of a total of 4075 documents retrieved from Scopus, 150 were included. Documents published between 1997 and 2023 were identified, with an average annual growth rate of 2.7%. A total of 439 authors were identified, 18 articles had a single author, and an average of 0.3 articles per author and a co-authorship index of 3.13 were found. The percentage of international collaborations was 30.7%. Brazil had the highest proportion of publications (26.4%), followed by Chile (17%) and Colombia (13.2%). Opción and Revista de Ciencias Sociales were the journals with the highest number of articles published (13 each). In the analysis of term co-occurrence, recent years showed an increase in the use of terms related to e-learning, information and communication technologies, virtual education, COVID-19, sustainable development goals, and URSULA (initiative on USR in institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean). Conclusions: A growth in scientific production on USR in Latin America and the Caribbean was identified. The interest in USR documents in recent years has been focused on COVID-19 and the challenges of virtual education and sustainable development., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2024 Urrunaga-Pastor D et al.)

Objective: To examine the impact of pre-fellowship publications on future research productivity and career placement among head and neck (H&N) surgery fellowship graduates., Methods: H&N surgery fellowship graduates between 2014 and 2022 were identified from publicly available data. Timing of fellowship graduation, number of publications during each stage of education and training, and number of first authorship publications were analyzed for association with scholarly productivity and academic career placement., Results: In our analysis of 409 H&N fellowship graduates, there was a strong positive correlation between the year of fellowship graduation and the average number of publications in residency (R 2  = 0.82) and fellowship (R 2  = 0.79). Graduates producing more than the average of 2.37 publications prior to residency had a significantly higher average number of publications during residency and fellowship compared to those who published below average (p < 0.001). A higher number of publications prior to and during residency were both independently associated with a higher likelihood of academic career placement (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, respectively). More first-author publications prior to residency were associated with a higher number of publications during residency and fellowship (p = 0.015). In sub-analyses, gender did not impact the average number of publications during residency and fellowship. Similarly, the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly impact the average number of publications during the fellowship when comparing the classes of 2020-2022 to 2017-2019., Conclusion: Research productivity among H&N fellowship graduates has increased in recent years. Research productivity in medical school and residency is associated with scholarly output in later stages of training and academic career placement., Level of Evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 134:3165-3169, 2024., (© 2024 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Abstract: Current literature fails to examine gender differences of authors presenting abstracts at national plastic surgery meetings. This study aims to assess the ratio of female to male abstract presentations at Plastic Surgery The Meeting (PSTM).The gender of all abstract presenters from PSTM between 2010 and 2020 was recorded. The primary outcome variable was authorship (first, second, or last). Trends in gender authorship were assessed via Cochran-Armitage trend tests. Chi-square was utilized to evaluate the association between author gender and presentation type and author gender and subspecialty.Between 2010 and 2020, 3653 abstracts were presented (oral = 3035, 83.1%; poster = 618, 16.9%) with 19,328 (5175 females, 26.8%) authors. Of these, 34.5%, 32.0%, and 18.6% of first, second, and last authors were female, respectively. The total proportion of female authors increased from 153 (20.4%) in 2010 to 1065 (33.1%) by 2020. The proportion of female first, second, and last authors increased from 21.8% to 44.8%, 24.0% to 45.3%, and 14.3% to 22.1%, respectively, and demonstrated a positive linear trend ( P < 0.001 ). The proportion of female first authors in aesthetics (23.9%) was lower than that for breast (41.8%), cranio/maxillofacial/head & neck (38.5%), practice management (43.3%), and research/technology (39.4%) ( P < 0.001 ).Our study demonstrates a significant increase in female representation as first, second, and last authors in abstract presentations at PSTM within the last decade, although the absolute prevalence remains low., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)