Publications In High Impact Journals Research Articles

Gender gap in cardiothoracic surgery randomized controlled trial and post-hoc analysis of randomized controlled trial authorship from 2014 to 2020.

To estimate gender disparities among first and last authorships in cardiothoracic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and association of gender with publications in high-impact journals. PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020 using R statistical software via the 'easyPubMed' package to retrieve pertinent data. The 'gender' package was utilized to determine gender using the United States Social Security Administration Baby Name Data. The percentage of female first and last authors were computed along with determining the uniqueness of the names. The association of gender and publication in high-impact peer-reviewed journals was delineated. Jonckheere's trend was computed. The database search retrieved a total of 4820 RCTs, of which gender was encoded for the first author in 3247 (67%) RCTs, among which 911 (28%) studies had women as first authors, with a similar trend across 7 years (P = 0.23). Gender was encoded for the last author of 3204 (66%) RCTs, of which 622 (19%) studies had women as last authors, with a similar trend across 7 years (P = 0.45). A total of 627 studies were published in high-impact-factor journals, among which 79 (16%) studies had female first authors and 67 (13%) studies had female last authors. There is an obvious gender disparity of first and last authors in cardiothoracic surgery-related RCTs, with a similar trend across 7 years. However, the post-hoc analysis did demonstrate a positive trend with an increase in the number of female first authors, demonstrating progress.

Research Productivity and Publishing Trends in Publicly Funded Social Work and Psychology Schools in India: A Bibliometric Analysis

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 research productivity 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.

Publishing during a sociology PhD in Australia: Differences by elite and non-elite universities and gender

We examined the latest decade of Australian sociology PhD completions for differences in the number and quality of research outputs students published during doctoral enrolment. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between Go8 PhD students and their non-Go8 PhD counterparts in terms of either the quantity of research publications achieved, or the quality of these publications as measured by high-impact journals. There was also insufficient evidence statistically to conclude that Go8 men and Go8 women differed from one another, or that non-Go8 men and non-Go8 women differed from one another in overall quantity of outputs and publishing in high-impact journals. However, publishing success of men and women, when combined, regardless of whether they were at elite Go8 or non-Go8 institutions, showed gender had a marginally significant effect on publication productivity, men outperforming women, in both publication counts and in publishing in high-impact journals.

Introduction to Special Issue Expanding Landscapes of Academic Writing in Academia

Academic writing is essential for disciplinary learning, academic success, knowledge creation, social status, and career advancement within academia (Fang, 2021). Academic research, writing, and publishing form the foundations of the majority of academic positions and remain primary considerations for hiring, renewal, promotion, and tenure in most higher education institutions (Ratković et al., 2019; Rawat & Meena, 2014). Early-career researchers must establish a significant track record of research, including publishing in high-impact journals (Couch, 2020). In graduate programs, academic writing competencies are critical for student success, with doctoral students often led to believe that they must be prolific academic writers to gain entry and advancement within academia (Mandke, 2019).

Bibliometric Analysis and Predictors of Citations for Publications of a Higher Institution

Purpose: This study aims to depict the productivity and impact of publications affiliated with Jordan University of Science and Technology (JUST), and to identify bibliometric factors associated with the number of citations. Methods: Using keywords and identification numbers, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for all publications affiliated with JUST from 1987-2022. The retrieved data was imported, cleaned, visualized, and analyzed using stataIC 16, Excel 395 software, and VOSviewer software. The bibliometric analyses were conducted for types of publications, year of publications, type of journals, faculties, departments, faculty members, and most cited publications. Networking analyses were also conducted for international collaboration and keyword analysis using VOSviewer. Univariable and multivariable Poisson regression models were conducted to estimate the impact of several bibliometric factors on citation numbers. Results: A total of 16,830 publications were affiliated with JUST and published between 1986 and 2022. The total number of citations was 330,046. The average citation per publication was 19.6 and the institutional h-index was 165. Most publications were original articles (81.8%) and 71.7% were published in traditional (non-open) journals. Publication and citation numbers increased steadily, until 2013, and then exponentially, afterward. ? The Faculty of Engineering had the highest number of total publications (4,593), while the Faculty of Medicine had the highest number of total citations (148,384). Professor Yousef S. Khader ranks first as JUST's influential faculty? with 640 publications and 110,777 citations. Factors contributing to higher incidence rate for citations include years since publication, indexing in Scopus and WoS, reviews, publication in open-access journals, and collaboration. Network analysis revealed significant clusters of authors and keywords, with strong connections to the United States and Saudi Arabia. Conclusion: The productivity nd impact of JUST publications have improved annually for all faculties and departments. ?However, this improvement seems to be limited and can be explained by several factors. Further improvements in research productivity and impact are needed by implementing relevant strategies such as collaboration and interdisciplinary research, publishing in high-impact journals, considering open-access publishing, considering the potential societal impact of research, increasing visibility and reputation through appropriate affiliations, publishing review articles, and monitoring research output over time.

Challenges facing Arab researchers in conducting and publishing scientific research: a qualitative interview study

Arab researchers encounter formidable obstacles when conducting and publishing their scientific work. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 17 Arab researchers from various Arab Middle East countries to gain a comprehensive understanding of the difficulties they face in research and publication. We analyzed the transcripts using reflexive thematic analysis. Our findings revealed several key challenges. First, Arab researchers struggle to conduct high-quality research due to limited resources, inadequate funding, and a lack of a supportive research infrastructure. Furthermore, a shortage of teamwork and mentoring diminishes research productivity. Perverse promotion policies, heavy teaching loads, and low salaries force many researchers to seek external income sources, leaving them with insufficient time for research. Regarding publishing in high-impact journals, Arab researchers confront challenges existing of insufficient scientific writing skills, underrepresentation on editorial boards, and unconscious biases against researchers from economically challenged areas. Finally, achieving research integrity is closely tied to lack of access to essential resources. To address these issues, our participants proposed targeted interventions at the institutional and external levels. For example, universities can implement mentoring programs, offer workshops on scientific writing and publishing, and foster a supportive institutional culture for research. Addressing the underrepresentation of Arabic researchers on editorial boards is crucial for equity in global scientific publishing. In conclusion, acknowledging and addressing these challenges will empower Arab researchers, elevate research quality, and promote equitable global scientific collaboration. Our findings provide guidance for universities, governments, and international donors seeking to enhance research and publication practices in the Arab Middle East.

Impact of authorship on citation rates: a comparative analysis of top 9999 articles in social science

Publishing in high-impact journals scanned in prestigious indexes and getting as many citations as possible have been the sources of recognition and credibility for researchers. On the other hand, there has been seen a change in authorship trends over the years. A key trend observed in authorship these days has been the decline of single-authored publications and the rise of multiple-authored ones. The relationship between authorship and citation rates remains unclear, though. Only a limited scope of studies has compared single and multiple-authored articles regarding citation rates, especially in social sciences. This research aims to determine whether there is a difference between single and multiple-authored social sciences journal articles in terms of citations they receive and, if so, to provide insights into the possible reasons behind this difference. The quantitative and qualitative data collected revealed four findings. First, in the field of social sciences, single-authored articles receive more citations than multiple-authored ones. Second, although multiple authorship brings multiple perspectives, it may harm the unity and cohesion of an article. Third, single-authored articles have a smooth and fluent style, which makes them easier to read. Last, the articles with a single author require more field expertise and deeper analyzes.

Does the tenure track influence academic research? An empirical study of faculty members in China

ABSTRACT Since the twenty-first century, universities in many countries, including China, have introduced tenure-track employment to attract outstanding faculty. Through a survey of 1099 faculty members from 21 high-level research universities in China, this study used a quasi-experimental method to examine the effect of the tenure track on faculty members’ academic performance. The results suggest that the implementation of the tenure track led to an increase in the number of academic publications, but a decrease in the number of high-quality academic articles. The study further analyzed the underlying mechanisms by which the tenure track affected faculty members’ academic performance, and found that introducing the tenure track increased cross-institutional collaboration, thereby promoting academic productivity. However, it resulted in a reduction in research collaboration within the institution, which hindered academic publication in high-impact journals. In terms of disciplinary heterogeneity, this study shows that the negative effect of the tenure track on publication quality was more significant in science than in engineering. Based on the research results above, this paper proposed several suggestions for improving the tenure system to ensure research excellence.

Understated gender disparities due to outcome-dependent selection: Commentary on Mackelprang et al. (2023).

What is the gender gap in invited publications in high-impact psychology journals? To answer this critical question, Mackelprang et al. (2023) examined invited publications in five high-impact psychology journals. They first calculated the share of women among authors of the invited publications (35.6%), then compared it with a "base rate" (42.3%; the share of women among associate and full psychology professors at R1 institutions). This comparison was presented as empirical evidence of women being underrepresented in the authorship of publications in these high-impact journals. In this commentary, we show that comparing these two descriptives-either using a difference or a ratio-provides little insight into the actual gender disparity of interest. A fundamental shortcoming of such a comparison is due to outcome-dependent selection. We explain what outcome-dependent selection is and why it is inappropriate. Crucially, we explain why, following such outcome-dependent selection, comparing the share of women in the selected sample with a "base rate" rules out drawing valid inferences about the actual gender gap. We urge researchers to recognize the perils of, and thus avoid, outcome-dependent selection. Finally, we suggest an alternative approach that permits a more accurate understanding of gender disparities in academia. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Pankaj Garg: A Community Doctor to a Master Innovator to a Global Icon

Pankaj Garg’s story is an interesting one and is a source of inspiration for all physicians and budding innovators. He started his career as a community doctor about two decades back in the year 2001, then changed gears in between to become an avid researcher and innovator. He progressed to become a leading international figure in his field. Garg has exemplified three important points. First, with proper temperament, it is possible to achieve academic excellence and conduct research even in a primary care setting. Second, every specialist should fulfill the role of a family physician as well. While pursuing any specialty, the role of a “general physician” should never be ignored. Third, innovation is a state of mind, and big institutions and well-equipped laboratories with costly gadgets are not a prerequisite to it. This is clearly exemplified by Pankaj Garg’s story that it is possible to excel in research, academics, and clinical work at the global level without any research budget, big institute tag, or the help of government or non-government organizations. Garg has more than 175 publications in high-impact journals. He has 30 innovations to his name, in and outside his field of expertise, all of which have been published in international journals. The innovations include new operative procedures, successful non-operative management, the discovery of new anatomical spaces, new concepts in disease understanding and management, and finding non-operative treatment for diseases for which surgery is routinely performed. It is impressive that seven of his innovations are popularly known by his name - Garg classification, Garg space, Garg protocol, Garg cardinal principles, Garg scoring system, Garg phenomenon, and Garg incontinence scores. Due to 30 innovations done single-handedly, Garg has been certified as a “doctor with maximum innovations” by several record books. Due to his ability to think “out-of-the-box” and his immense contribution to advancements in the field of proctology, he is recognized as a global icon in his field. Garg is a master teacher. He has taught surgical skills and the art of scientific paper writing to hundreds of surgeons and doctors. In spite of limited resources at his disposal, Garg goes out of his way to help poor people. He performs about 30–40% of operations free of cost. He has successfully treated patients from 41 countries and several patients from royal families of the Gulf who offered him lucrative money to move to the Middle East. However, Garg flatly refused all offers because his priority was to serve his country and countrymen first. Hence, a simple doctor working in a small city was never discouraged by the lack of resources, and the fear of working alone in a small set-up and without any help from the government has carved out a tale that can motivate professionals in any corner of the world. Dr. Garg’s story provides immense inspiration to every practicing physician in the country to innovate whether he/she is practicing in a primary healthcare center or a rural area.

The commodification of academic publishing – Relevance to cancer palliative care literature

ABSTRACT The commodification of academic publishing refers to the process of turning academic research and scholarship into a marketable product that can be bought and sold for profit. This has become an increasingly prevalent issue in recent years, as academic publishing has become dominated by a small number of large commercial publishers who control access to research and charge exorbitant fees for access to academic articles. In the context of cancer palliative care literature, the commodification of academic publishing has several important implications. First, it means that access to important research on cancer palliative care may be restricted to those who can afford to pay for it, effectively limiting its dissemination and impact. This is particularly problematic in low-income countries or regions where resources for cancer palliative care are already limited. Second, the commodification of academic publishing can lead to the proliferation of predatory journals that publish low-quality or even fraudulent research for profit, which can lead to misleading or harmful information being disseminated to practitioners, policymakers and the public. Finally, the emphasis on profit in academic publishing can create pressure for researchers to prioritise publishing in high-impact journals rather than focusing on research that is most relevant to the needs of cancer palliative care patients and their families. This can create a skewed incentive structure that values prestige over impact, potentially undermining the quality and relevance of research in this field. In summary, the commodification of academic publishing has significant implications for cancer palliative care literature, including issues of access, quality and relevance. It is important for researchers, policymakers and publishers to work together to address these challenges and ensure that the best research is made accessible to all those who need it, regardless of their ability to pay.

Prof. Amod Gupta - The leader and the legacy.

Prof. Amod Gupta - The leader and the legacy.

Personnel development, shortage of funds in publishing in high-impact journals, and university’s placement system in Nigeria

Personnel development, shortage of funds in publishing in high-impact journals, and university’s placement system in Nigeria

Empirical analysis of webometric ranking in Nigeria polytechnics education sector

The January 2022 edition of webometric ranking placed Yaba College of Technology as number one from 152 polytechnics in Nigeria. The ranking weight is 66 for country ranking, 8162 world ranking, Impact, Openness, and Excellence of 9698, 4558, and 7190 respectively. The negative variation and low webometric ranking of Yaba College of Technology that happened to be the first higher institution of learning in Nigeria with the slogan the first and still the best is a point of concern and motivates this research work. This research work collected data to evaluate the indicators for webometric ranking among the students and staff of Yaba College of Technology, a total of 346 were sampled students 44.51 % and Staff 55.49 %. The discussion and analysis of data obtained revealed that the poor webometric ranking is due to inadequacy of the necessary ICT infrastructure to encourage robust web presence; non-availability of up-to-date and scanty content on the Polytechnics website; Non-frequent usage of the Polytechnic website by the staff and students of the Polytechnic; the inadequate number of external networks (subnets) links with Polytechnic website; insufficient number of the top-cited publications in high impact Journals from the staff of the Yaba College of Technology; and Scanty number of the profile of staff from the Polytechnic on Google Scholar and ResearchGate, etc. among others. This research work opined that low webometric ranking could result in the following negative impact on the polytechnics lowering the esteem of the Polytechnic in the eyes of stakeholders, potential students and funding agencies, academic exchange with reputable institutions from other parts of the world for teaching, learning and research may writhe. The consequence of our findings recommendations was made to improve webometric ranking in future.

Is academic writing becoming more positive? A large-scale diachronic case study of Science research articles across 25years.

Academic writing is developing to be more positive. This linguistic positivity bias is confirmed in academic writing across disciplines and genres. The current research adopted sentiment analysis and examined the diachronic change in linguistic positivity in the full texts of 2,556 research articles published in Science in 25 years. The results showed that academic writing in research articles in the journal Science has become significantly more positive in the past 25 years. The findings of this study confirm linguistic positivity bias in academic writing based on empirical data from Science. Reasons for the increasingly positive language use in science articles might include the popularization of science, the growing number of researchers, and the difficulty of publishing in high-impact journals. Finally, this study discussed the implications of our findings for researchers, editors, and peer reviewers.

A Scoping Review on Perception-Based Definitions and Measurements of Corruption

Studies on perceptions of corruption have grown in recent years but are still struggling with several conceptual and measurement issues. This scoping review provides an analysis of the peer-reviewed literature on perception-based corruption. From a total of 1,374 articles surveyed, ninety ultimately met inclusion criteria. We found two main quantifiable trends when exploring our sample: publications in high-impact journals were slow in addressing perception-based corruption, and perceptions of corruption are of interest not only to political science and sociology but to other disciplinary traditions. In more qualitative terms, we observe that the explicit or implicit definitions of “corruption” behind these studies tend to fall into two categories: corruption as a “Deviant Process” or as a “Deviant Outcome,” while measurements can be typified in a two-dimensional scheme: “Sociotropic” vs. “Egocentric” and “Generic” vs. “Specific.” Most measurement approaches surveyed tend to use a “deviant process” definition, whereas the measurement of corruption as a “deviant outcome” still lacks development. This might represent a challenge for future research focusing on the social understanding of corruption in various contexts (administrative, organizational, political, economic, legal, etc.).

Editorial introductions

Editorial introductions

Insufficient Addressing Responses is One of The Main Reasons Behind the Rejection of Manuscripts Publishing in a High Impact Journals

Scientific research is an important reason that indicates the progress of countries and the general scientific level. This study aims to research and verify some of the causes and obstacles that the Iraqi authors face and prevent them or lead rejection of their manuscripts from publishing in high-impact journals. Information was collected by questionnaires surveyed and some phone interviews with chief- editors of Iraqi journals subjected to the Scopus classification. The results showed that there are many reasons behind the rejection of research in high-impact journals، these reasons include several causes such as poor quality of the English language، which is known as a language of publication in Iraq for the science field، as well as the lack of experience and the inefficiency of the authors' responses on the evaluators' comments.، these were the main three reason which obstructing the publishing process of Iraqi researchers.

Striving for gender equity at theMedical Journal of Australia

Striving for gender equity at the<i>Medical Journal of Australia</i>

Librarians’ Satisfaction with Promotion Practices in University Libraries in South-South, Nigeria

In universities, promotion is the recognised avenue through which staff move from one level of position to another and has come to be associated with improved staff performance. The study investigates librarians’ satisfaction with promotion practices in university libraries in South-South, Nigeria. The descriptive survey design was adopted for the study. The targeted population is academic librarians from 14 (federal and state) universities in the South-South region in Nigeria, and the total enumeration sampling technique was adopted. A four-point Likert-type questionnaire was designed to elicit responses on librarians’ satisfaction with their promotion in university libraries. Two hundred and forty-three (243) questionnaires were distributed, out of which 180 were returned and found usable, giving a response rate of 76.2%. The results were analysed with percentages and mean and are presented in tables and figures. The study revealed that librarians have a low view of the practice of promotion because of their dissatisfaction with the promotion practice carried out in the university libraries. Factors such as research publications in local and international journals, attendance of conferences and publication in their proceedings, acquisition of additional qualifications, and years of experience at a particular level were shown to be vital before librarians could be promoted from one rank to another. The findings further established that scoring strategies based on library services and activities, evidence of active participation in professional bodies, and attendance of conferences and workshops are important during the assessment for promotion to the professorial cadre. The study recommends active participation in attending conferences, workshops and collaboration with colleagues and publishing in high impact journals as well as quality service delivery to users of the university community.