Journal Publishing Research Articles

Depiction and Description: Insights into Southern Alps Glaciers Conveyed by John Gully’s Paintings and Julius Haast’s Paper at the Royal Geographical Society

In June 1862, Julius Haast (1822–1887), the Canterbury Provincial Geologist, wrote to Joseph Hooker, Assistant Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew, informing him that “being now naturalized I think it my duty to offer my work to the scientific societies in England.” Haast informed Hooker that as soon as his topographical map was finished, he would send the botanist “an account of the geological features of the Alps, on deposits of the glacial period, accompanied by maps, sections and sketches,” requesting him to present the account to the Geological Society of London.[i] Although this anticipated initial foray into publishing in British scientific journals did not eventuate until 1865,[ii] on 12 November 1863 Haast sent a copy of his large topographical map of the Southern Alps,[iii] accompanied by extensive notes on the physical geography of that region and a set of 12 watercolour paintings (e.g. fig. 1), to the geologist Sir Roderick Murchison,[iv] President of the Royal Geographical Society. Haast hoped that those landscape paintings would “best enable the members, to gain an insight into the wild mountain masses [of the Southern Alps], with their snowfields, glaciers and lakes [emphasis added].”[v] [i] Sascha Nolden, Esme Mildenhall and Simon Nathan, The Correspondence of Julius Haast and Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1861–1886 (Wellington: Geoscience Society of New Zealand, 2013), 22. Haast became a British citizen in February 1861. [ii] See Julius Haast, “Notes to a Sketch-Map of the Province of Canterbury, New Zealand, Showing the Glaciation During the Pleistocene and Recent Periods as Far as Explored,” Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 21, nos. 1–2 (1865): 87–96. [iii] On 11 June 1863, Haast informed Hooker that he was sending Murchison a large map with a set of watercolour drawings by the next mail (Nolden, Mildenhall and Nathan, Correspondence Haast-Hooker, 42–43). [iv] Ibid., 57. [v] Julius Haast, “Notes Accompanying a Map of the Province of Canterbury” (Royal Geographical Society Manuscript Archive, 1862), 1.

Abstracts from the 19th International Congress of Nutrition and Dietetics 2024

Every four years the International Confederation of Dietetic Associations (ICDA) hosts the International Congress of Nutrition and Dietetics. (ICND). In 2024, the ICND was held June 12- 14 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Informed by the overarching theme of “Rise to the Challenge”, the comprehensive program covered a wide range of topics, sharing the best of applied science, practice and training experiences in the field of nutrition and dietetics. This special article in the Fall issue of the Canadian Journal of Dietetics Practice and Research contains all abstracts accepted for presentation at ICND 2024 (oral abstracts, poster presentations, expert lectures, panel discussions, and workshops). The abstract peer-review and selection process was completed by the ICND 2024 Scientific Committee. All abstracts are published exactly as submitted without further review by the journal Editor or publisher.

Evaluating a Comprehensive Toolkit for Journal Editors and Publishers: Insights from Nepal and Developing Nations

The Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Publishing (C4DISC) has published a focused toolkit to promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in scientific publications and help editors and publishers create a more inclusive and equitable publishing environment. The online toolkit has several sections. Among the recommendations are developing an inclusive culture and mission, collecting and reporting demographic data of authors, reviewers and editors using inclusive terminology, recruiting broadly and internationally for the positions of journal editors, board members and reviewers, train and mentor peer reviewers, and fostering equity in peer review. Many recommendations can be easily adopted by developing country journals while some others may be more challenging. The toolkit is a good initiative to promote diversity, equity, inclusivity and accessibility in academic publishing.

UPAYA PENGENALAN EDITORIAL DAN PENULISAN JURNAL ILMIAH PADA TENAGA PENDIDIK DI SMP NEGERI 2 KAMPAR KIRI HILIR KABUPATEN KAMPAR

Abstract: Partner situation analysis, teachers become professional educators, especially for those who have received teacher certification. Teachers are required to write scientific articles published in scientific journals so that their work can be read by various groups in need. Partner problems, teachers are still not familiar with scientific editors in the context of publishing scientific manuscripts, there is still a lack of teacher knowledge about how to submit scientific manuscripts to scientific journal editorials to be published in scientific journals. Submitting scientific manuscripts is the first step for teachers in order to publish their scientific work during teaching. So far, teachers still do not understand what scientific journals are and also how to submit scientific manuscripts to editors so that they can be published in scientific journals. The target output to be achieved in this activity is a form of change in the knowledge and ability of teachers as educators to submit scientific manuscripts to editors to be able to publish their scientific manuscripts to scientific journals. The solution provided in this activity is to provide training on submitting scientific manuscripts to editorial to be published in scientific journals. Based on the results of the service that was carried out on December 15, 2016, information was obtained that there was a change in teacher knowledge about what scientific journal publishers are, the usefulness of publishers, submitting manuscripts to publishers and how strategies for writing articles so that they can be published in scientific journals.

Summary of the C4DISC Toolkit: A Focused Toolkit for Journal Editors and Publishers: Building DEIA in Editorial Roles and Peer Review

Summary of the C4DISC Toolkit: A Focused Toolkit for Journal Editors and Publishers: Building DEIA in Editorial Roles and Peer Review

Gender and Geographical Representation on Editorial Board Members of Medical Informatics Journals.

Previous work has suggested that gender and geographical distribution (affiliation) of Editors-in-Chief (EiC) and Editorial Board (EB) members are inequitable in representation of scientific communities, and could benefit from increasing diversity of representation. Specifically, previous studies suggest that male and ethnically white (or non-minoritized groups) are overrepresented. Such differences in representation may potentially influence the scientific and scholarly record. This paper aims to build on pre-existing literature by examining the diversity of representation among EiCs and EB members in the top (Q1) journals in the "Medicine-Health Informatics" category (ranked by SCImago Journal and Country Rank, or SJR) in terms of gender as assessed by genderize.io) and geographical distribution of affiliations. Preliminary findings are consistent with those of previous work on the topic: only 25% (8/32) of the EiCs in the selected journals are female, while females only represent 32.7% (426/1303) of the EB members across journals. Furthermore, the US is highly represented in EBs, with more than half of the members, i.e., 52.2% (698/1337), being US-affiliated. Present results suggest the need for an intentional approach to diversifying representation on editorial boards of medical informatics journals. Such intention can be seen as part of a call to action from important stakeholders, including medical informatics leaders and programs, journal management and publishers, and the medical informatics and scientific community more generally.

Publisher preferences for a journal transparency tool: A modified three-round Delphi study

Background We propose the creation of a journal transparency tool (JTT), which will allow users to obtain information about a given scholarly journal’s operations and policies. We are obtaining preferences from different stakeholders to inform the development of this tool. This study aimed to identify the publishing community’s preferences for the JTT. Methods We conducted a modified three-round Delphi survey. Representatives from publishing houses and journal publishers were recruited through purposeful and snowball sampling. The first two Delphi rounds involved an online survey with items about JTT metrics and user features. During the third round, participants discussed and voted on JTT metric items that did not reach consensus after round 2 within a virtual consensus meeting. We defined consensus as 80% agreement to include or exclude an item in the JTT. Results Eighty-six participants completed the round 1 survey, and 43 participants (50% of round 1) completed the round 2 survey. In both rounds, respondents voted on JTT user feature and JTT metric item preferences and answered open-ended survey questions regarding the JTT. In round 3, a total of 21 participants discussed and voted on JTT metric items that did not reach consensus after round 2 during an online consensus group meeting. Fifteen out of 30 JTT metric items and none of the four JTT user feature items reached the 80% consensus threshold after all rounds of voting. Analysis of the round 3 online consensus group transcript resulted in two themes: ‘factors impacting support for JTT metrics’ and ‘suggestions for user clarity.’ Conclusions Participants suggested that the publishing community’s primary concerns for a JTT are to ensure that the tool is relevant, user-friendly, accessible, and equitable. The outcomes of this research will contribute to developing and refining the tool in accordance with publishing preferences.

Open Science for language assessment research and practice in China: A response to Winke

Winke delineates objectives and suggests a series of steps for the implementation of Open Science (OS) in language assessment. While we recognize the relevance and potential success of these concrete measures for OS in language assessment, the distinctive challenges confronting OS in China may prevent researchers and practitioners from fully capitalizing on them. In response to Winke, we first reflect on the significant challenges encountered by Chinese language assessment researchers and practitioners. These challenges include the absence of an ethos of openness in language assessment research and practice, difficulties in publishing in scholarly journals, including open-access (OA) journals, and the sensitive nature of the data involved in large-scale, high-stakes language testing. To address these issues and forge ahead, we propose a community-oriented, grassroots-driven approach to cultivating an OS culture and fortifying collaboration among stakeholders. We hope that, through concerted efforts, we can promote OS and, more importantly, enhance the quality of language assessment research and practice in China.

Charting Excellence: Unveiling the Influence of Scientific Publications on Global University Rankings

ABSTRACT The global ranking of universities has grown substantially within both academia and industry. This study aims to explore how scientific publications, their visibility, and citations contribute to improving university rankings. A survey was conducted online involving 2000 faculty members at the University of Dhaka. Email addresses were gathered from the university website, and 311 faculty members provided responses, resulting in a response rate of 15.55%. Faculty members acknowledged that writing scientific articles for top-ranked journals requires statistical, analytical and other relevant skills. The benefits of publishing in prestigious journals indicating a generally positive perception among the respondents. This study empirically demonstrated that publishing in journals listed in databases like Scopus or Web of Science enhances visibility, which in turn leads to more citations. Together, these factors contribute to improving university rankings. Dhaka University must focus on increasing its publications in top-tier journals by implementing incentive programs, fostering research collaborations, and allocating additional research grants. By understanding these universal standards for scholarly excellence, other universities can tailor their strategies to enhance faculty support and foster a culture conducive to impactful research publication. The findings from this study offer valuable insights that can be applied to other universities worldwide.

Behind the curtain of Australasian Psychiatry: The practice of a medical journal and a call for reviewers.

The process of medical scientific journal publishing merits further explanation for authors and readers. Prospective authors need to understand the scope of the journal and the article types that are published. We give an overview of the editorial process, including selection of reviewers, peer review and decisions regarding revision, acceptance and rejection of papers for Australasian Psychiatry. We encourage authors and readers to submit papers, and volunteer as peer reviewers, working together with the journal editorial team.

Readiness of Pakistani journals for open access publishing

PurposeThis study was designed to discover the readiness of the higher education commission (HEC)-recognized journals of Pakistan in terms of human, financial and technological resources, technical expertise, institutional support, availability of open access (OA) policy, availability of guidance and training, willingness, motivation and so on for OA journal publishing and to expose the challenges in OA journal publishing.Design/methodology/approachA quantitative research approach was used and a structured questionnaire was developed to meet the objectives of this study. A survey method was used to collect data from the editors of all 329 HEC-recognized journals in Pakistan.FindingsThe respondents of all the HEC-recognized journals of Pakistan are neutral and are not of the view that they have sufficient financial, human, technological/infrastructural resources and technical expertise to continue/initiate an OA journal publishing. ‘No academic reward’; and ‘no monetary reward for the editorial staff’ are both enormous challenges for OA journal publishing. The perceived challenges of OA have a negative impact on readiness for OA publishing. The readiness level of the respondents of the OA journals is higher as compared to the readiness level of the respondents of non-OA journals.Research limitations/implicationsThis study covered the lists of HEC-recognized journals of 2019. More studies may be conducted based on updated lists of HEC-recognized journals. Qualitative studies may also be conducted to discover the readiness of the HEC-recognized journals of Pakistan for OA journal publishing.Originality/valueThis study is the first comprehensive study on this phenomenon and is an effort to fill this gap to invigorate scholarly literature. It may attract the attention of policymakers, funding bodies, parent institutions of the journals and the HEC regarding the readiness of journals in terms of financial, human, technological/infrastructural resources, technical expertise of the journals and challenges of journals to prompt the OA journal publishing paradigm.

Perceptions of journal editors on the use of eponyms in anatomical publishing: the need for compromise

While arguments have been made both for and against the value of anatomical eponyms, limited research exists regarding their use by anatomists. As the editors of the principal international anatomy journals have purview and control of terminology in anatomical journals, their perceptions regarding the relevance, ethics and inclusivity of eponym use in anatomy and in publishing in anatomical journals were investigated. A validated, confidential and anonymized self-administered questionnaire which included open-ended questions was distributed to the 22 Editor-in-Chiefs/Senior Editors of anatomical journals. Of the 16 (73%) editors who responded to the survey, only 56% were aware that eponyms had been censured since the time of the 1895 Nomina Anatomica. The majority of responding editors found the use of Latin- and Greek-derived terms more valuable when communicating with students and peers, but also thought eponyms were acceptable in manuscripts submitted to their journals. Thirteen (81%) of the responding editors agreed that eponyms play a vital role in the history of anatomy, and some thought they were important for discussing bioethics concepts. However, 62.5% felt that there were valid reasons for their discontinuation. Half of the respondents did not consider the continued use of eponyms an ethical concern. Responding editors of anatomical journals prefer the use of Latin- and Greek- derived terms when interacting with other anatomists and students. However, the continued use of eponyms was seen as an important opportunity for discussion on the history and ethics of anatomy.

Quantitative Changes in the Publishing of Lithuanian Scientific Journals in 2015–2022: Public and Private Sectors’ Adaptation to the Changing Conditions

The article analyses the quantitative changes in the Lithuanian scientific journal publishing in 2015-2022. The study reveals the problems of public bibliographic accounting and terminology in order to comprehensively analyse the public and private sector published print and electronic scientific journals. The gaps and uncertainties identified allow for the improvement of official publication records in the future, avoiding ambiguities in the assessment of the publication volumes of scientific journals. Science policy makers and implementers should take the initiative to standardise the definition of scientific journals, as this is the only way to achieve a clearer approach to this form of science communication. Although the annual volume of scientific journal publications has shrunk by 18.1% (from 265 (2015) to 217 (2022) publications), the decline itself has not been sharp. The decline has been stabilised by business involvement, changes in the evaluation of colleges, and the transformation of professional journals, book series and conference proceedings into scientific journals. Flexibility has been provided by electronic publishing instruments, which have reduced the dependence on external financial sources. The public publishing sector has tended to reduce the number of scientific journals in all scientific fields. This was mainly due to the reorganisation of the higher education network, the qualitative requirements for scientific articles and the reorganisation of scientific collectives. The publishing business has seen the greatest potential in the fields of technology and the medical and health sciences, and as a result, the number of journals published in these fields has not declined and continues to grow. Despite the private sector's growth trends, 50% of journals have 30 or more years of publication. This forms the core of Lithuanian scientific journals, which public sector publishers are striving to preserve and integrate into the international scientific environment.

‘Special issue-ization’ as a growth and revenue strategy: Reproduction by the “big five” and the risks for research integrity

ABSTRACT The exponential growth of MDPI and Frontiers over the last decade has been powered by their extensive use of special issues. The “special issue-ization” of journal publishing has been particularly associated with new publishers and seen as potentially “questionable.” Through an extended case-study analysis of three journals owned by one of the “big five” commercial publishers, this paper explores the risks that this growing use of special issues presents to research integrity. All three case-study journals show sudden and marked changes in their publication patterns. An analysis of special issue editorials and retraction notes was used to determine the specifics of special issues and reasons for retractions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data. Findings suggest that these commercial publishers are also promoting special issues and that article retractions are often connected to guest editor manipulation. This underlies the threat that “special issue-ization” presents to research integrity. It highlights the risks posed by the guest editor model, and the importance of extending this analysis to long-existing commercial publishers. The paper emphasizes the need for an in-depth examination of the underlying structures and political economy of science, and a discussion of the rise of gaming and manipulation within higher education systems.

Clarifying middle authorship contributions to reduce abuses in science publishing and assessment of top-ranked SJR biochemistry and pharmacology journals' authorship criteria.

So-called "middle authors," being neither the first, last, nor corresponding author of an academic paper, have made increasing relative contributions to academic scholarship over recent decades. No work has specifically and explicitly addressed the roles, rights, and responsibilities of middle authors, an authorship position which we believe is particularly vulnerable to abuse via growing phenomena such as paper mills. Responsible middle authorship requires transparent declarations of intellectual and other scientific contributions that journals can and should require of co-authors and established guidelines and criteria to achieve this already exist (ICMJE/CRediT). Although publishers, editors, and authors need to collectively uphold a situation of shared responsibility for appropriate co-authorship, current models have failed science since verification of authorship is impossible, except through blind trust in authors' statements. During the retraction of a paper, while the opinion of individual co-authors might be noted in a retraction notice, the retraction itself practically erases the relevance of co-author contributions and position/status (first, leading, senior, last, co-corresponding, etc.). Paper mills may have successfully proliferated because individual authors' roles and responsibilities are not tangibly verifiable and are thus indiscernible. We draw on a historical example of manipulated research to argue that authors and editors should publish publicly available, traceable contributions to the intellectual content of an article-both classical authorship or technical contributions-to maximize both visibility of individual contributions and accountability. To make our article practically more relevant to this journal's readership, we reviewed the top 50 Q1 journals in the fields of biochemistry and pharmacology, as ranked by the SJR, to appreciate which journals adopted the ICMJE or CRediT schools of authorship contribution, finding significant variation in adhesion to ICMJE guidelines nor the CRediT criteria and wording of author guidelines.

Lack of Funds for Publications form a Threat to Young Medical Authors

Background: Young medical authors face several problems. One of them is their common limited access to funds that may be used to pay the Article Processing Charges (APC) of medical journals. Objectives: It is investigated whether the APCs are high, indeed, and – if so – how this problem for young authors can be tackled. Significance: It is important that good research is published in reliable and well-read journals. Measures should therefore be taken to avoid that young researchers publish in journals that are not or hardly read, only because they offer low APCs. Methodology: Analysis of the APCs of medical journals is carried out by searching for the APC on the website of the hundreds of journals that approached the present authors during one year with a request to submit a manuscript. Results: It is found that most journals have APCs that are too high for junior authors to pay personally. Almost all journals with an affordable APC have a quality below internationally acceptable standards and are not or hardly read (or cited). Young authors commonly see the advantages of publishing in low-APC journals on the short term, but they can difficultly overview the disadvantages on the longer term. This makes the ‘battle’ against low-quality journals difficult. Conclusions: Young authors should be warned that choosing a journal on the basis of a low APC may affect their scientific reputation. All medical institutes and organizations were research is carried out should develop a procedure that enables young authors to avoid publishing in low-quality journals, by supplying grants to cover the APC asked by appropriate high-quality journals.

Digital health interventions in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review protocol

Background The integration of digital health (eHealth) interventions into primary healthcare systems has gained recognition lately in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) to enhance healthcare quality, accessibility, and efficiency. These interventions may offer effective strategies in mitigating the burden of chronic diseases by facilitating access to remote healthcare and optimising its processes. This scoping review aims to identify and assess eHealth interventions implemented in primary care settings in LMICs for further development and adaptation. Methods and analysis We will search two electronic databases, such as Scopus and Embase, to identify peer-reviewed studies reporting on eHealth interventions implemented in primary care settings within LMICs. This review will encompass evidence published in the English language without a time frame restriction. We will remove duplicates from the search, and two reviewers will independently assess all articles for eligibility by first screening the title and abstract, followed by a full-text review. Eligible articles will be extracted, and data will be charted according to types of intervention and settings using a standardised form. Ethics and dissemination There is no ethical review required for this scoping review. We plan to disseminate the findings by presentations at conferences and publishing in open-access journal.

Editorial

INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY IN ACADEMIC PUBLISHING Some years ago research publications were mostly available in printed form; they were less widely disseminated and were mostly accessible by subscription only. However, the demand nowadays is for fast publication that supports rapid dissemination of research findings, open access publishing that advocates for free access to research outputs, and increased accessibility to academic publications in terms of affordability, wider audience and diverse authorship. Publishers, including academic journal publishers, are leveraging on modern technological advances to innovate and fulfil market expectations, especially in addressing the challenge of meeting accessibility standards. In order to grow their audience and visibility, most journals have shifted to online publication, with e-journals gaining more traction as they are more convenient, economical, discoverable, and easier to share and navigate through. To further maximise the exposure of published articles, journals are also publishing articles in multiformats to facilitate sharing. They promote short summaries and other microcontent of these publications through social media to make scholarly information accessible. Authors are encouraged to share their published articles on various platforms to increase networking opportunities, possibilities for research collaboration, and, most importantly, to increase citations and grow their impact.

Explosive increase and decrease in articles, citations, impact factor, and immediacy index during the COVID-19 pandemic: a bibliometric study

Purpose: This study investigated how Journal Citation Reports (JCR) metrics changed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022), with the aim of sharing this information with stakeholders in the publishing community.Methods: In total, 7,689 journals listed in the JCR-Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) from 2016 to 2022 were selected. Data were analyzed using pivot tables in Microsoft Excel. We calculated the compound annual growth rate to investigate changes in JCR-SCIE articles, citations, the journal impact factor, and the immediacy index during the COVID-19 period.Results: A marked increase was noted in the number of articles and citations during the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2022. This surge was primarily driven by a significant rise in COVID-19–related articles. Consequently, four JCR metrics exhibited a sharp increase in 2020, followed by an unusually steep decline in 2022. Articles, citations, and the journal impact factor reached their highest recorded levels in 2021, while the immediacy index saw its most significant growth and intense citation activity in 2020 before experiencing notable decreases in 2021 and 2022. Our findings indicate that there was an unprecedented and dramatic shift in these four JCR metrics during the COVID-19 period, with current trends suggesting a reversion to historical compound annual growth rate levels.Conclusion: The journal publishing and scientific communities should consider these explosive changes when applying JCR metrics to evaluate articles and endeavor to mitigate the adverse effects of the unusual concentration of articles and citations during the COVID-19 period. These results constitute valuable information to be shared among researchers and stakeholders within the journal publishing community.

Finding Medical Photographs of Patients Online: Randomized, Cross-Sectional Study.

Photographs from medical case reports published in academic journals have previously been found in online image search results. This means that patient photographs circulate beyond the original journal website and can be freely accessed online. While this raises ethical and legal concerns, no systematic study has documented how often this occurs. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to provide systematic evidence that patient photographs from case reports published in medical journals appear in Google Images search results. Research questions included the following: (1) what percentage of patient medical photographs published in case reports were found in Google Images search results? (2) what was the relationship between open access publication status and image availability? and (3) did the odds of finding patient photographs on third-party websites differ between searches conducted in 2020 and 2022? The main outcome measure assessed whether at least 1 photograph from each case report was found on Google Images when using a structured search. Secondary outcome variables included the image source and the availability of images on third-party websites over time. The characteristics of medical images were described using summary statistics. The association between the source of full-text availability and image availability on Google Images was tested using logistic regressions. Finally, we examined the trend of finding patient photographs using generalized estimating equations. From a random sample of 585 case reports indexed in PubMed, 186 contained patient photographs, for a total of 598 distinct images. For 142 (76.3%) out of 186 case reports, at least 1 photograph was found in Google Images search results. A total of 18.3% (110/598) of photographs included eye, face, or full body, including 10.9% (65/598) that could potentially identify the patient. The odds of finding an image from the case report online were higher if the full-text paper was available on ResearchGate (odds ratio [OR] 9.16, 95% CI 2.71-31.02), PubMed Central (OR 7.90, 95% CI 2.33-26.77), or Google Scholar (OR 6.07, 95% CI 2.77-13.29) than if the full-text was available solely through an open access journal (OR 5.33, 95% CI 2.31-12.28). However, all factors contributed to an increased risk of locating patient images online. Compared with the search in 2020, patient photographs were less likely to be found on third-party websites based on the 2022 search results (OR 0.61, 95% Cl 0.43-0.87). A high proportion of medical photographs from case reports was found on Google Images, raising ethical concerns with policy and practice implications. Journal publishers and corporations such as Google are best positioned to develop an effective remedy. Until then, it is crucial that patients are adequately informed about the potential risks and benefits of providing consent for clinicians to publish their images in medical journals.