Editors Of Scientific Journals Research Articles

Macedonian Association of Medical Editors Initiatives to Advance the Integrity of Science and Publishing.

Background:In the early 20th century some unfavorable conditions and trends in science and publishing in R. Macedonia and other countries in the South Eastern Europe (SEE) Region were recognized and it became necessary to act to protect the integrity of science and publishing. The increasing number of scientific journals in biomedicine and published papers in them has not always been matched by increased quality in publishing due to lack of information and education of the scientific community, especially of the young scientists, about ethical principles in research and publishing. In addition, some unethical behavior, fraud and attempts by experts for increasing their scientific productivity in research and publishing their results in scientific journals was recognized.Objective:To present the initiatives, chronology of activities and leading role of Academician Momir Polenakovic towards the establishment and initial development of the Macedonian Association of Medical Editors (MAME) which has a mission for advancing the integrity of science and publishing.Method:A retrospective study based on review of the relevant literature, archive materials, minutes from organizational meetings and workshops and other documentation related to activities in the initial process for establishing and defining the mission and objectives of MAME.Results:The expansion of higher education and inappropriate implementation of the Bologna Declaration and the European Credit Transfer System in R. Macedonia from 2004/2005 contributed to a decline of the study criteria for obtaining higher education diplomas and postgraduate education degrees, as well as numerous frauds in scientific research and publishing activities in biomedicine and other fields. The first meeting of the Initiative Board for organizing an SEE Conference on research and publishing integrity and a workshop for editors of scientific journals was held in the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts (MASA) on Nov. 1st, 2013. In April 2014 two preparatory meetings of the Organizational Board were held and the Workshop for editors of scientific journals and the Constitutional meeting for establishing MAME were held on Apr. 25, 2014. The first President of MAME (with a two-year mandate) was Academician Momir Polenakovic and in 2016 he was elected as the first Honorary President of MAME.Conclusion:The establishment of MAME in April 2014 was an important initiative and strategic decision toward raising awareness among editors of scientific journals and other stakeholders for preventing scientific and publishing misconduct and for educating the scientific community for creating an ethical research environment.

Reusable data is the new oil

New oil data is 21st century jargon. This movement has not been widely echoed in Indonesia. Although some initiatives should be recognized and appreciated, the status of the availability of reusable data in most countries, especially in Indonesia is still low. Most of the data published in Indonesian open access journals are in the form of pdf files that cannot be reused. We advise editors of Indonesian scientific journals to consider adopting FAIR data sharing by encouraging authors to share their data as additional files in a machine readables format, e.g. csv or xls. This effort will also contribute to the principles of transparency and sustainable development in Indonesia's research ecosystem.

THE USE OF INNOVATIVE TOOLS IN THE EDITORIAL PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS OF UKRAINE

Rapid progress in the field of publishing scientific journals, on the one hand, facilitates all editorial processes, and on the other hand, increases the risks of losing the uniqueness of a scientific article. The growing need of scientific journals for supporting tools that would, on the one hand, protect journal editions from unscrupulous authors who resort to the practice of scientific plagiarism, and on the other hand, instill in authors a sense of responsibility for the texts they send. The purpose is to reveal the problems of using text similarity scanners - plagiarism checking services in the editorial process of scientific journals of Ukraine, to verify by empirical research the theoretical hypothesis about the existence of certain types of practices of academic plagiarism in the Ukrainian scientific environment. Survey of editors of professional editions of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine has been conducted using the CAWI method with the help of the Google forms functionality. The sample consisted of 99 experts (editors of category “A” journals – 8%; editors of category “B” journals – 92%), who represented the general population on the basis of “journal category”, which ensured the validity of the results. The opinion of the editors of scientific journals on the use of text similarity scanners in the editorial process has been determined. The most widely used services are Unicheck and Antiplagiat, which, according to respondents, most simply and concretely solve the problem of plagiarism and reuse of text. It has been identified that publishing houses that publish journals with international distribution and those indexed by the scientometric platforms Scopus and WoS (category “A” according to the national classification) mostly use similarity scanners. Publishing houses operating only within Ukraine, the journals of which are not represented in prestigious scientometric platforms, often ignore plagiarism detection software altogether and rely solely on the opinion of reviewers and editors. It is shown that the practice of using text similarity scanners, although entrenched in the Ukrainian scientific and publishing space, is still not widespread enough and does not cover the vast majority of scientific journals that rely only on traditional forms of reviewing scientific texts.

Reproducibility and Replication of Experimental Particle Physics Results

Recently, much attention has been focused on the replicability of scientific results, causing scientists, statisticians, and journal editors to examine closely their methodologies and publishing criteria. Experimental particle physicists have been aware of the precursors of non-replicable research for many decades and have many safeguards to ensure that the published results are as reliable as possible. The experiments require large investments of time and effort to design, construct, and operate. Large collaborations produce and check the results, and many papers are signed by more than three thousand authors. This paper gives an introduction to what experimental particle physics is and to some of the tools that are used to analyze the data. It describes the procedures used to ensure that results can be computationally reproduced, both by collaborators and by non-collaborators. It describes the status of publicly available data sets and analysis tools that aid in reproduction and recasting of experimental results. It also describes methods particle physicists use to maximize the reliability of the results, which increases the probability that they can be replicated by other collaborations or even the same collaborations with more data and new personnel. Examples of results that were later found to be false are given, both with failed replication attempts and one with alarmingly successful replications. While some of the characteristics of particle physics experiments are unique, many of the procedures and techniques can be and are used in other fields.

Minimum Information Required to Annotate Food Safety Risk Assessment Models (MIRARAM)

In the last decades, mathematical models and model-based simulations became important elements not only in the area of risk assessment concerning microbiological and chemical hazards but also in modelling biological phenomena in general. Unfortunately, many of the developed models are published in non-standardized ways, which hinders efficient exchange, re-use and continuous improvement of models within the risk assessment domain. The establishment of guidelines for model annotation is an important pre-condition to overcome these obstacles. Additionally, implementation of annotation guidelines can improve transparency, quality control and even aid the clarification of intellectual property rights. Here, we address the question of “What is the minimum set of metadata that should be provided for a model in the risk assessment domain?”. The proposed guideline focuses on food safety risk assessment models and is called “Minimum Information Required to Annotate food safety Risk Assessment Models (MIRARAM)”.MIRARAM supports the model creator during the model documentation step and could also be used as a checklist by scientific journal editors or database curators. Software developers could take up MIRARAM and develop easy-to-use software tools or new features in existing programs that can help model creators to provide proposed model annotations in harmonized file formats. Based on experiences from similar guidelines in related scientific disciplines (like systems biology), it is expected that MIRARAM could contribute to the promotion of application and re-use of models as well as to implementing more standardized quality control in the food safety modelling domain.

The impact of COVID‐19 lock‐downs for European (female) immunologists – our views as members of the EFIS gender and diversity task force

The impact of COVID‐19 lock‐downs for European (female) immunologists – our views as members of the EFIS gender and diversity task force

ЗДОБУТКИ В СФЕРІ НАУКОВОГО РЕДАГУВАННЯ ТА КОМУНІКАЦІЙ

During 2020 a series of lectures and master classes, dedicated to scientific writing in journals indexed by international scientometric databases were held with the support of Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, the Shevchenko Scientific Society, the Western Scientific Centre of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic the events were held using Zoom platform. Also the participants had opportunity to view online broadcasts and recordings of the events at “Рroceedings of the Shevchenko Scientific Society. Medical Sciences” journal Facebook page and Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC40L7KlZ5UU4hrMj_--yqHw). Foreign colleagues-scientists from Great Britain and India, who are expert reviewers of Scopus and Web of science databases became the speakers of these webinars as well as Ukrainian colleagues-scientists. Scientific authors, graduate students, doctoral students, as well as editors of scientific journals of Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University and other medical universities of Ukraine were the target audience of these English-speaking events. Each registered participant received a certificate, providing a certain number of points of continuous professional development.

Offline: Managing the COVID-19 vaccine infodemic

If you read News Punch (aka “Where mainstream fears to tread”), you will be familiar with a series of articles about the prospects for a COVID-19 vaccine. With headlines such as “Big Pharma Exec: We Are Exempt From COVID-19 Vaccine Liability Claims”, the website has published report after report casting doubt on the integrity of vaccine science and even the likelihood of a vaccine becoming available. You will find similar pieces on other websites, such as Infowars and AlterNet. The arguments these articles peddle seem deliberately designed to sow uncertainty. Elon Musk is alleged to have said that he won't allow his children to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Executives from one vaccine manufacturer are alleged to have sold “millions in stock as Covid vaccine trials enter phase 3”. Doctors are accused of demanding the US Government punish Americans who refuse a COVID-19 vaccine. These stories may be having an effect. Last month, Nature Medicine published the results of a survey describing the views of over 13 000 people across 19 countries. 14·2% of the respondents completely or somewhat disagreed with the statement that they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine if generally available. 17·9% completely or somewhat disagreed with the statement that they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine if their employer recommended it. In many countries, vaccine hesitancy is sufficiently high to render community immunity a challenging goal. The survey suggests that far too little has been done to prepare the public for the arrival of a COVID-19 vaccine. Misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines is a serious threat not only to public health but also to national economic security—a fact made all the more urgent as a second wave of coronavirus sweeps across Europe. In their 2019 book, The Misinformation Age, Cailin O'Connor and James Owen Weatherall explain how false beliefs persist and spread. They emphasise the social character of fake news. The connections between us in groups or networks enable the propagation of misleading evidence as well as true beliefs. Models of communication show the importance of trust in shaping the spread of beliefs. The greater the distrust among those with different views, the greater the risk of permanent polarisation. We are also prey to conformity bias—a desire to agree with others and to trust the judgments of others. Our predilection to conformity makes it harder to stand against the crowd. If your network holds strong anti-vaccine views, you may find it more difficult to arrive at your own independent judgment, even if you are inclined to have confidence in a vaccine. And misinformation is made worse when there are active propagandists spreading fake news. The field of COVID-19 vaccines is full of propagandists seeking to manipulate and mislead. What can be done? Although not writing about COVID-19 specifically, O'Connor and Weatherall draw conclusions that can be applied to our present predicament. A warning: they stress that anyone who thinks the “marketplace of ideas” will sort fact from fiction is dangerously mistaken. First, then, social media companies, especially Facebook and Twitter, must do more to police their networks and eliminate false information about a potential COVID-19 vaccine. Second, trusted politicians from all political parties (and other public figures) need to speak out in support of COVID-19 vaccine science. Third, vaccine scientists (and editors of scientific journals that publish vaccine science) must raise their standards for the work they do (and publish). O'Connor and Weatherall argue that scientists need to build trust by abandoning industry funding. That isn't going to happen for COVID-19 vaccine trials. But it is important that scientists retain maximum independence from manufacturers who sponsor their studies. It doesn't help the cause for a COVID-19 vaccine when pharmaceutical company executives talk encouragingly about a vaccine. Propagandists use their words to fuel distrust about vaccine science. Fourth, journalists should avoid the unwitting spread of misinformation. They should never give any kind of platform to vaccine sceptics. Fifth, lawmakers can do more to regulate sources of misinformation, just as they have done for other threats to health, such as tobacco. O'Connor and Weatherall's central claim is that “We need to recognise fake news as a profound problem that requires accountability and investment to solve.” COVID-19 vaccine misinformation is not taken as seriously as it should be. That complacency needs to end.

The main gaps for randomised-controlled trials in psychiatry: a bibliometric study

Background There is evidence of a progressive increase in the number of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) in the area of psychiatry. However, some areas of psychiatry receive more attention from researchers potentially to the detriment of others. Methods Aiming to investigate main gaps for RCTs in psychiatry, the present bibliometric study analysed the bi-annual and five-year rates of RCTs in the main database of medical studies (Pubmed) over the 1999–2018 period (n = 3,449). This analysis was carried out using the ICD-10 mental and behavioural chapter. ICD-10, was the edition of the manual used throughout the above period. Results Overall, after 16 years of considerable increase in the bi-annual absolute number of RCTs, there has been a slowdown in the last 4 years, similar to other medical areas. Affective, organic and psychotic disorders, and depression, schizophrenia and dementia were the top studied groups and disorders respectively – ahead of other groups/diagnoses. For substance use disorders, there has been a decrease of RCT in the last 5 years, in line with the fall of alcohol use disorder in the ranking of most studied disorders. Delirium and mild cognitive disorder are both ascending in this ranking. Personality disorders and mental retardation stand out as the least studied groups over the whole assessment period. Conclusion Novel treatments, ease of access to patient populations, and ‘clinical vogue’, seem to be more important in guiding the undertaking of RCTs than the actual need as indicated by prevalence and/or burden of disorders and public health impact. Regarding specific disorders, acute/transient psychosis; mixed anxiety and depression; adjustment disorder; dissociative and conversion disorders; somatization; hypochondria; and neurasthenia, would deserve future RCTs. Clinical researchers and editors of scientific journals should give special attention to the less studied areas and disorders, when considering conducting and publishing RCT studies, respectively.

Natural history collections are critical resources for contemporary and future studies of urban evolution.

Urban environments are among the fastest changing habitats on the planet, and this change has evolutionary implications for the organisms inhabiting them. Herein, we demonstrate that natural history collections are critical resources for urban evolution studies. The specimens housed in these collections provide great potential for diverse types of urban evolution research, and strategic deposition of specimens and other materials from contemporary studies will determine the resources and research questions available to future urban evolutionary biologists. As natural history collections are windows into the past, they provide a crucial historical timescale for urban evolution research. While the importance of museum collections for research is generally appreciated, their utility in the study of urban evolution has not been explicitly evaluated. Here, we: (a) demonstrate that museum collections can greatly enhance urban evolution studies, (b) review patterns of specimen use and deposition in the urban evolution literature, (c) analyze how urban versus rural and native versus nonnative vertebrate species are being deposited in museum collections, and (d) make recommendations to researchers, museum professionals, scientific journal editors, funding agencies, permitting agencies, and professional societies to improve archiving policies. Our analyses of recent urban evolution studies reveal that museum specimens can be used for diverse research questions, but they are used infrequently. Further, although nearly all studies we analyzed generated resources that could be deposited in natural history collections (e.g., collected specimens), a minority (12%) of studies actually did so. Depositing such resources in collections is crucial to allow the scientific community to verify, replicate, and/or re‐visit prior research. Therefore, to ensure that adequate museum resources are available for future urban evolutionary biology research, the research community—from practicing biologists to funding agencies and professional societies—must make adjustments that prioritize the collection and deposition of urban specimens.

Sir George Gabriel Stokes, Bart (1819-1903): his impact on science and scientists.

Lucasian Professor Sir George Gabriel Stokes was appointed joint-Secretary of the Royal Society in 1854, a post he held for the unprecedented period of 31 years, relinquishing the role when he succeeded T.H. Huxley as President in 1885. An eminent scientist of the Victorian era, Stokes explained fluorescence (he also coined the word) and his hydrodynamical formulae (the 'Navier-Stokes equations') remain ubiquitous today in the physics of any phenomenon involving fluid flows, from pipelines to glaciers to large-scale atmospheric perturbations. He also made seminal advances in optics and mathematics, and formulae that bear his name remain widely used today. The historiography however appears to understate Stokes's significant impact on science as unacknowledged collaborator on a wide range of scientific developments. His scientific peers regarded him as a mentor, advisor, designer of crucial experiments and, as editor of the Royal Society's scientific journals, arbiter of the standards of excellence in scientific communication to be attained before publication would be considered. Three brief case studies on Stokes's correspondence with Lord Kelvin, Sir William Crookes and the chemist Arthur Smithells exemplify how his impact was conveyed through the work of other scientists. This paper also begins consideration of why the character and worldview of Stokes led him to eschew personal reputation and profit for the sake of science and the Royal Society, and of how the development of the discipline of history of science has impacted on historiography relating to Stokes and others. This article is part of the theme issue 'Stokes at 200 (Part 1)'.

Richard von Mises’ work for ZAMM until his emigration in 1933 and glimpses of the later history of ZAMM

Richard von Mises’ work for ZAMM until his emigration in 1933 and glimpses of the later history of ZAMM

The Main Gaps for Randomized-controlled Trials in Psychiatry: A Bibliometric Study

Abstract Background There is evidence of a progressive increase in the number of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) in the area of psychiatry. However, some areas of psychiatry receive more attention from researchers potentially to the detriment of others. Methods Aiming to investigate main gaps for RCTs in psychiatry, the present bibliometric study analysed the bi-annual and five-year rates of RCTs in the main database of medical studies (Pubmed) over the 1999–2018 period (n = 3,449). This analysis was carried out using the ICD-10 mental and behavioural chapter. ICD-10, was the edition of the manual used throughout the above period. Results Overall, after 16 years of considerable increase in the bi-annual absolute number of RCTs, there has been a slowdown in the last 4 years, similar to other medical areas. Affective, organic and psychotic disorders, and depression, schizophrenia and dementia were the top studied groups and disorders respectively – ahead of other groups/diagnoses. For substance use disorders, there has been a decrease of RCT in the last 5 years, in line with the fall of alcohol use disorder in the ranking of most studied disorders. Delirium and mild cognitive disorder are both ascending in this ranking. Personality disorders and mental retardation stand out as the least studied groups over the whole assessment period. Conclusion Novel treatments, ease of access to patient populations, and ‘clinical vogue’, seem to be more important in guiding the undertaking of RCTs than the actual need as indicated by prevalence and/or burden of disorders and public health impact. Regarding specific disorders, acute/transient psychosis; mixed anxiety and depression; adjustment disorder; dissociative and conversion disorders; somatization; hypochondria; and neurasthenia, would deserve future RCTs. Clinical researchers and editors of scientific journals should give special attention to the less studied areas and disorders, when considering conducting and publishing RCT studies, respectively.

The role of scientific journal editors during the COVID-19 pandemic

The role of scientific journal editors during the COVID-19 pandemic

Exploratory and confirmatory research in the open science era

Abstract Applied ecological research is increasingly inspired by the open science movement. However, new challenges about how we define our science when biodiversity data are being shared and re‐used are not solved. Among these challenges is the risk associated with blurring the distinction between research that mainly seeks to explore patterns with no a‐priori articulated hypotheses (exploratory research), and research that explicitly tests a‐priori formulated hypotheses (confirmatory research). A rapid screening of a random selection of the peer‐reviewed literature suggests that neither experimental protocols nor hypothesis‐testing sensu stricto are common in applied ecological research. In addition, most experiments are carried out on small spatial scales, which contrast with current global policy needs and research trends towards addressing large spatial and temporal scales. This latter trend makes it unfeasible for policy to rely mainly on insights gained from experimental research. To solve fundamental local, regional and global societal challenges, we need both exploratory and confirmatory research. However, the fundamental roles that confirmatory research testing a‐priori hypothesis play in establishing causal relationships need to be revaluated in applied ecological research. A clearer distinction between exploratory and confirmatory research is currently needed, and could be facilitated by allocating journal sections to different types of research; by embracing new tools offered by the open science era, such as pre‐registration of hypothesis; by establishing new systems where post‐hoc hypotheses emerging through exploration can also be registered for later testing; and by more broad adoption of causal inference methods that foster more structured testing of hypotheses about causal mechanisms from observational biodiversity data. Synthesis and applications. To gain the full benefits of the open science era, researchers, funding bodies and journal editors should explicitly consider approaches and incentives that encourage openness about methods and approaches, as well as value the plurality of scientific approaches needed to address questions in applied ecology and conservation science.

Entering its Fourth Year of Publication

Entering its Fourth Year of Publication

Manipulation of bibliometric data by editors of scientific journals

Manipulation of bibliometric data by editors of scientific journals

Addressing the “Bias Gap”: A Research-Driven Argument for Critical Support of Plurilingual Scientists’ Research Writing

This article outlines findings from a case study investigating attitudes toward English as the dominant language of scientific research writing. Survey and interview data were collected from 55 Latin American health and life scientists and 7 North American scientific journal editors connected to an intensive scholarly writing for publication course. Study findings point to competing perceptions (scientists vs. editors) of fairness in the adjudication of Latin American scientists’ research at international scientific journals. Adopting a critical, plurilingual lens, I argue that these findings demand a space for more equity-driven pedagogies, policies, and reflective practices aimed at supporting the robust participation of plurilingual scientists who use English as an additional language (EAL). In particular, if equity is indeed a shared goal, there is a clear need for commitment to ongoing critical self-reflection on the part of scientific journal gatekeepers and research writing support specialists.

Establishment of the Indonesian Association of Scientific Journal Editors

Establishment of the Indonesian Association of Scientific Journal Editors

Evaluation of scientific journals: Disserpedia and the opinion of the Russian publishing community

Introduction. Scientific journal editors must thoroughly evaluate the content intended for publication in scientific journals. To date, there has been insufficient research on the analysis of the legal status of Russian scientific journal editors, who receive heavy criticism for violating publication ethics. This fact makes the evaluation procedure an acute problem that is becoming increasingly relevant. Additionally, the opinion of the Russian publishing community has not been studied to identify problems related to the evaluation of scientific j ournals and, in particular, the activities of Dissernet. In this regard, this study aims to fill this research gap. Materials and Methods . The study is based on an analysis of the Disserpedia data available on the public site https://biblio.dissernet.org. The materials were provided by the project coordinators and a survey eliciting the opinions of the members of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) was conducted. Results. The analysis of the Disserpedia data revealed that 88 % of the journals included in this resource committed massive violations. Notably, only 10 % of the journals made some efforts to rectify the situation. At the same time, the results of the survey showed that almost 90 % of the respondents were ready to address the issues raised by Dissernet. According to the author, this result indicates that the Russian scientific publishing community is ready to begin the dialogue with public institutions that have undertaken the task of evaluating journals. Virtually, one-third of the journals in the Disserpedia cannot be accused of incorrect borrowings. Approximately 70 % of the journals in the Dissedopedia are published by educational and scientific organizations. Commercial organizations that publish scientific journals constitute one-fifth of the total amount of journals in the Disserpedia. Conclusion. The Russian scientific publishing community is ready to implement international ethical rules in their editorial activities and improve the status of already published content.