Scopus Delisting Process Behind Closed Doors: A Case Study of Nurture

The challenges of academic physician-scientists in gastroenterology and hepatology: From managing indebtedness, securing grants, to managing conflicts

Recently, initiatives to share data on peer review (Squazzoni et al, 2020) have brought about better understanding of the peer review process across different disciplines (Buljan et al, 2020, Squazzoni et al 2021a, Squazzoni et al 2021b). Some studies (Strang & Siler, 2015; Siler & Strang, 2016) examined the changes from initial submissions to journals to publication. Another study (Teplitskiy & Bakanic, 2016) explored how well peer reviews predict the article’s citation impact. A study of almost half a million peer review reports from 61 journals (Buljan et al., 2020) showed that peer review reports were longer in social science than in medical journals. It also showed that their language characteristics differed across disciplines (Buljan et al., 2020).The aim of our study was to further examine structural and linguistic differences between articles and the characteristics of the peer review process, including the language used and outcomes of peer review reports, in medicine and health sciences vs. social sciences.To select the articles we used the search engine of the Open Research Central (ORC) platform, which covers different fields, and applied the following filters: “Subject area: Medical and health sciences”, and “Subject area: Social science”. “Article type(s): Research article” filter was also applied. We ended up with 1912 medical and 477 social science articles. To create the samples of articles with clear medical/health vs. social sciences content, we excluded those with a tag for medicine and health sciences and any other disciplinary field except biology and life sciences and those with a tag both for social sciences, and biology and life sciences. This left 408 medical and 54 social science articles. Using the DOIs of filtered articles, we downloaded them manually in an XML format. Articles that had not been reviewed were excluded, yielding a total of 51 articles with a social sciences tag and 361 articles with a medicine and health sciences tag, as well as their peer review texts.We analysed them using the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) text analysis software and word embeddings, a method in which words are given mathematical vector representation. To assess the differences between the articles and their reviews across medical and social sciences, we used the one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s test. For multivariate frequency distribution of the variables we used the contingency test. All analyses were carried out in JASP, version 0.14.1. Articles from medicine and health sciences and those from social sciences differed in structure. The median word count in the introduction section was 674 (IQR=308.0–637.0) for social sciences and 431 (IQR=420.5–1029.0) for medical sciences. The conclusion section was also longer in social sciences, with 263 words (IQR=135.5–516.0) vs. 94 words (IQR=64.0–168.0) in medical sciences (p<0.01, Mann Whitney). The percentage of articles with merged discussion and conclusion was higher in social sciences, whereas medical articles followed the IMRaD structure more often and contained fewer declarations and non-IMRaD sections. They also contained more figures. Linguistic analysis showed that social science articles had higher word count, higher clout, and a less positive tone.Longer wording was also dominant in peer review reports on social science articles. However, the social and medical sciences did not significantly differ in the characteristics of the peer review process and comments from all stages of review or in the outcome of the peer review process (approved, approved with reservation, or rejected) between the two disciplines. There were also no statistically significant differences in manuscript changes between the disciplines, with the exception of text changes in the introduction section that changed more in the social sciences. The review process for articles in social and medical/health sciences may not differ as much as is usually believed. This, however, may be partly owed to the use of the same ORC platform, which may have uniform policies and processes.

A Tool for Reviewers

The Journal of Vascular Surgery: 1982 to 1990

The paper deals with the analysis of the approaches in defining the main research directions in the field of leasing of innovations and innovations in leasing. Developing the Internet and expansion of mobile Internet, the advent of the Internet of Devices, Fintech, Insurtech, and the development of sharing economy provokes many debates about the future of innovation within the asset finance and innovation in the leasing of assets. This paper aimed to determine the scientific publication tendencies in the field investigating the issues on leasing of innovations and innovations in leasing to identifying prospective research areas. The methodological instruments of this paper are bibliographic tool VOSviewer, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS) databases. The study sample is 2513 scientific documents, published in the scientific journals indexed by Scopus (1915 documents) and WoS (598 documents) databases. The study has no limited time sample. The obtained results by Scopus and WoS tools showed the growing publication tendencies on the investigated issues. Besides, the number of papers in the Scopus database had a growing tendency with a variable rate. There is a significant increase in the number of papers that occurred from 2000 to 2010. In turn, the number of papers in journals indexed by WoS had been regularly rising during the analyzed period with a growth rate of 19,9%. Thus, this database shows a considerable growth of publications from 2010 to 2019. In 2019 the number of articles in the field of leasing of innovations and innovations in leasing increased by 412% compared to 2010. Therefore, the investigated issues remain popular in investigations of the great string of scientists. In the Scopus database, mostly the issues on leasing of innovations and innovations in leasing were investigated under the subject area as follows: Medicine, Engineering, Social Sciences, Environmental Science, Business, Management and Accounting, Computer Science. The author noted that the most significant part of the scientists who analyzed the leasing of the innovations and innovations in leasing was from the USA, China, United Kingdom, and Germany. Herewith, in 2019, the number of papers devoted to investigated issues enhanced in scientific journals with high impact factors such as Land Use Policy, European Journal of Operational Research, Ecology and Society. Therefore, it indicates that investigated issues are actually in the trends of sharing economy. The obtained results by VOSviewer analysis allowed identifying six clusters of the scientific publications scrutinized the leasing of the innovations and innovations in leasing from different perspectives. It worth mentioning that three out of six clusters have a close connection. The first biggest cluster links the keywords as follows: sustainable development, environmental impact, environmental protection, energy policy, land use, land management, fishery management, laws and legislation, risk assessment, etc. In turn, the second cluster indicated on the investigations in the sphere of information system and software in leasing. Three clusters (the third, fourth and fifth) are connected by the words «leasing – legal aspect – health care/medical practice management – hospital equipment/hospital information system», etc. The keywords such as financial management, taxes, capital financing, leasing – property, capital expenditure, accounting, legal aspect, management, and tax connected them with the sixth cluster. Keywords: innovation, leasing, leasing management, innovation in leasing.

Nanobiotechnologies represent a rapidly growing field of interest. Several European conferences during the past year have highlighted the wide‐ranging potential of applying techniques at the molecular and atomic levels to understand and transform biosystems, and of using biological principles and materials to create new devices at the nanoscale. This convergence of disciplines holds great promise in medicine for improved diagnostics, less invasive monitoring devices and more targeted therapies, and also has potential for agricultural and environmental applications. However, relatively little has been written about the ethical and social implications of this emerging research area. This article seeks to examine some of these questions, and is based on a report produced by the ethical, legal and social advisory (ELSA) board of the Nano2Life European Network of Excellence in Nanobiotechnology (Bruce, 2006). Nano2Life is funded by the European Commission (EC) under the Sixth Framework Programme. It brings together European research groups from 12 countries to collaborate in specific multidisciplinary projects, which combine the life sciences with microtechnologies and nanotechnologies, materials science, physics and chemistry. The aim is to develop new research tools and applications for medical diagnosis and therapy, and for monitoring food safety and environmental health. Seeking to learn from the major controversy in Europe over genetically modified (GM) foods, Nano2Life established—as an integral part of the network—an advisory board to evaluate possible ethical, legal and social implications. Its role is to advise on particular research projects, to educate participating scientists, and to produce a broad overview of the ethical and social issues (Bruce, 2006), which are summarized in this article. The reflections presented here are insights from board members and some participating scientists, and draw on an initial literature survey (Jomann, 2006). A main aim is to make researchers in both academia and industry aware of the broad ethical …

Foreword

This study has been conducted to measure the collaborative research among the social scientist at Jawaharlal Nehru University, India during the year 1998–2017. The sample of 2128 articles has been collected from the Scopus database during the year 1998–2017 and were analyzed to study the collaborative coefficient, collaborative index, year wise degree of collaboration, modified collaboration coefficient, co-authorship index and language wise distribution of articles. From this study, it is found that the growth rate of publications in the social sciences is rapidly increasing. The collaborative coefficient is below 0.5 which implies that single-authored papers are dominating. The co-authorship index for the single-authored paper is higher, and the degree of collaboration is low as the value is 0. The research articles are the preferred format to publish in the journals. This study was limited to the data collected from the Scopus database during the period 1998–2017. The findings have significant implications for the researchers/scholars to know the growth and trend of collaborative research in the social sciences. This study extends the knowledge on the bibliometric tools employed to measure the collaborative research in the social sciences.

Increasing burden of institutional review in multicenter clinical trials of infertility: the Reproductive Medicine Network experience with the Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PPCOS) I and II studies

Editorial

Ethics in nursing research and research publications.

Happy new year 2011

Multi-stakeholders governance (MSG) is a new governance design that involves many experts from multiple stakeholders to participate in dialogue, decision-finding (and possibly decision-making) and solution to common problem that occur. This article aims to analyze and identify topics on multi-stakeholder governance with a focus on social science disciplines. In particular, this article takes qualitative research with a literature study approach. The approach adopted in this paper consists of an initial selection of articles based on keywords of “multi-stakeholder governance” in social science disciplines in the Scopus database - limited to titles, abstracts, keywords, and in English and using articles published from early to 2020. Several stages are then identified; The first stage is analyzing the number of citations and analysis by country, and analysis of cumulative citations. The second stage analyzes the primary approaches, strategies, and scope used in MSG learning. Finally, the primary topic analysis of several previous studies on MSG. Therefore, the study results illustrate that there are eleven main topics in MSG in social science disciplines; some of the propositions on these topics are summarized.

The Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) is one of the Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) in the Earth Observing System Data and System (EOSDIS) of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Focusing on human interactions in the environment, SEDAC has as its mission to develop and operate applications that support the integration of socioeconomic and earth science data and to serve as an Information Gateway between earth sciences and social sciences. Across several themes, SEDAC provides open access to and fosters use of over 240 curated data products, within 44 collections. SEDAC also provides access to over 2000 open access maps and facilitates open access to a variety of services for analyzing and visualizing the Earth science data that it manages. SEDAC is a member of the International Science Council (ISC) World Data System (WDS) and the Earth Science Partners (ESIP) and contributes to various international initiatives, including the Research Data Alliance (RDA) and the Group on Earth Observations (GEO). SEDAC is operated by the Center for International Earth Science Network (CIESIN), a research and data center of the Earth Institute of Columbia University. CIESIN is an interdisciplinary department that works at the intersection of the social, natural, and information sciences, and specializes in on-line data and information management, spatial data integration and training, and interdisciplinary research related to human interactions in the environment. The SEDAC website is accessible from the https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/ webpage.

AIM: The aim of this study was to analyse current scientific impact of Published Papers about Interior Design from South East Europe in the Scopus Database (1977-2015).MATERIAL AND METHODS: Title search of the Scopus database was performed on October 02, 2015 about interior design from South East Europe in the Scopus Database (1960-2014). A total number of 5,808 documents worldwide were identified with "interior design" in the title, abstract or keywords. By limitation to South East European countries (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Kosovo, Moldova, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Turkey, and Italy) only 151 documents were separated (2.6% of all documents). Selected documents were analysed by year, source, author, country/territory, document type, and subject area.RESULTS: The number of publication in the period of 1977-2005 year was very small and was increased with maximum of 19 papers in 2011 year. Three academic journals published most of the papers: Medicina Del Lavoro (14 papers); Work and Design Principles (5 papers), and Practices (4 papers). The biggest number of papers belongs to the author Nicoletti S with 6 papers, followed by Di Leone G, Carino M, Trani G, and Yildirim K (5 papers each). Universities from Turkey and Italy are dominant institutions which published academic papers. Prevalence of the published papers about interior design from South East Europe in the Scopus Database (1977-2015) was from Italy (67 papers), Turkey (55 papers), and Croatia (10 papers). Most of the documents published about Interior Design from South East Europe were articles and conference papers. Subject area medicine was predominant followed by engineering, social sciences, and others.CONCLUSION: Officials of the academic institutions in South East European countries should undertake more effective and proactive policies in order to include more journals in the Scopus database.