Submission Of Articles Research Articles

Health Care Service Provision to Leprosy Patients in Western Province, Sri Lanka

Official publication of the College of Community Physicians of Sri Lanka and was established in 1995. Full text articles available.Journal of the College of Community Physicians of Sri Lanka (JCCPSL) has been recognised by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) as a publication following the ICMJE Recommendations. The journal is indexed in DOAJ.Manuscripts are only accepted online through the portal of the JCCPSL https://jccpsl.sljol.info/ . The prospective authors must read carefully the section on Author Guidelines and prepare their manuscript accordingly. To submit a manuscript or to check the status of a submission the authors must first be registered in the JCCPSL Editorial Management System using an existing or newly created username and password. Next, choose the ‘Start Submission’ link and follow the five-step article submission process which is a simple and self-guided process.

Unmasking the Healthcare Issues Slipping through the Cracks during the Pandemic

Over the last nine years, the International Journal of Medical Students (IJMS) has been assisting medical students to seek excellence in research. From its conception, IJMS has been publishing tri-annually; however, due to the huge number of article submissions to the journal, IJMS is now publishing four issues every year. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a rise in the incidence of crime and interpersonal violence, including sexual assault. Despite this, it has also been found that the number of such offences reported has decreased. In this editorial, we bring to light the under-recognized issue of sexual assault by highlighting an article regarding medical students' training in caring for assault victims that will be published in this issue. We also discuss other under-recognized healthcare problems in this editorial. This upcoming issue of IJMS is one that not only contains research and experience pieces about the COVID-19 pandemic's ramifications; beautifully recounted and inspiring experiences from medical students can also be found in this issue. Combined with the intriguing case reports and a letter-to-the-editor, we are sure that this upcoming issue will pique the curiosity of our worldwide readership.

Introducing the New Editorial Team

The European Journal of Family Business (EJFB) was founded in 2011 with the name Revista de Empresa Familiar, changing its name to the current EJFB in 2016. As a result, the year 2021 marks the 10th anniversary of this journal, which provides an appropriate occasion to share our vision for the direction of the journal, identifying some priorities for the coming years.
 We inherit a journal that wants to be a platform through which to explore new perspectives of family business research, enhancing the communication between academia and practice. We aim to support rigorous research with practical interest for family firms and entrepreneurial families while also nurturing new and overlooked lines of research that might deepen our understanding of the family firm field. We envision EJFB as a point of convergence where the rich heterogeneity of the family business realm presents competing perspectives, from which scholars and practitioners can question, enrich and extend the dialogue between academia and practice. We are also committed to fostering conversations in different fields that work in the broad domain of family business, welcoming scholarship from affiliated fields.
 In addition to research papers and reviews, we encourage the submission of articles that provide new ideas or perspectives by building upon existing or new theories to understand contemporary trends related to enterprises in general and family firms in particular, point/counterpoint debates, articles with a practical orientation and practitioner commentaries. Overall, we look forward to serving and bridging the gap between research and practice by facilitating communication in both directions. The journal will feature a new section entitled Commentary where family business practitioners can write about their experiences. We believe that their comments will help ‘theorists and researchers keep practice in mind when they do their work’ (Vought et al., 2008, p. 1112). The aim of this section is to enhance the research agenda by learning scientifically from practice and also applying ‘the theoretical and empirical research findings back to practice’ (Strike, 2012, p. 168).
 We believe this new editorial team is particularly well suited to the tasks of supporting research of family firms for its applicability to practice and helping practitioners advance family firms' knowledge from a research perspective. We therefore look forward to working with a global community of family business scholars and practitioners.
 In concluding this introduction, the Editorial Team of EJFB wants to thank the journal’s founder and outgoing editor, Dr. Vanesa Guzman-Parra, who saw the need for a journal dedicated to advancing research on family firms. We also extend a heartfelt thank you to the Editorial Board for the trust they have placed in us as the new Editorial Team. We would also like to thank our Managing Editor J. Roberto Vila and UMA Editorial for their continued and substantial assistance that has enabled the journal to reach a significant milestone: its 10-year anniversary! We also extend our gratitude to all our reviewers, readers and authors, occasional and regular, whose support of EJFB is acknowledged and greatly appreciated. We look forward to reading your insights in future issues.
 Editor-in-Chief
 Dr. Amaia Maseda, University of the Basque Country
 
 Deputy Editors
 Dr. Vanessa Diaz-Moriana, University of Balearic Islands
 Dr. Remedios Hernández-Linares, University of Extremadura
 Dr. Valeriano Sanchez-Famoso, University of the Basque Country
 

Technology and Disasters: The Evolution of the National Emergency Tele-Critical Care Network.

Technology and Disasters: The Evolution of the National Emergency Tele-Critical Care Network.

Retracted] MicroRNA-205 acts as a tumor suppressor in osteosarcoma via targeting RUNX2.

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that certain of the cell Transwell assay data in the article (featured in Fig. 3C and D) were strikingly similar to data that appearing in different form in other articles by different authors at different research institutions, which were already under consideration for publication or had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article had already appeared in different form in other articles prior to its submission to Oncology Reports, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. After having been in contact with the authors, they agreed with the decision to retract the paper. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published in Oncology Reports 35: 3275-3284, 2016; DOI: 10.3892/or.2016.4700].

Retracted] MicroRNA-124 suppresses the migration and invasion of osteosarcoma cells via targeting ROR2-mediated non-canonical Wnt signaling.

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that certain of the cell Transwell assay data in the article (featured in Figs. 2C and 5B) were strikingly similar to data appearing in different form in other articles by different authors, which were either already under consideration for publication or had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article were either already under consideration for publication, or had already been published elsewhere, prior to its submission to Oncology Reports, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. After having been in contact with the authors, they agreed with the decision to retract the paper. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published in Oncology Reports 34: 2195‑2201, 2015; DOI: 10.3892/or.2015.4186].

Retracted] Knockdown of PREX2a inhibits the malignant phenotype of glioma cells.

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that cell invasion assay data in the article (featured in Fig. 4A) were strikingly similar to data appearing in different form in another article by different authors at different research institutions, which had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Furthermore, flow cytometric data featured in Fig. 2D were strikingly similar to those in another previously published paper, and cell cyle data included in Fig. 3 had apparently previously published elsewhere. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article had already appeared in different form in other articles prior to its submission to Molecular Medicine Reports, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. The authors also expressed their intention to retract the paper on the grounds that the corresponding author and several of the authors failed to confirm the approval of the final version of the manuscript. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published on Molecular Medicine Reports 13: 2301‑2307, 2016; DOI: 10.3892/mmr.2016.4799].

Retracted] MicroRNA‑195 inhibits cell proliferation, migration and invasion by targeting defective in cullin neddylation1 domain containing1 in cervical cancer.

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that certain of the Transwell assay data in the article (featured in Figs.3B and 7B) were strikingly similar to data appearing in different form in other articles by different authors at different research institutes that had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Furthermore, the scratch wound assay data in Fig. 7A of the above paper were strikingly similar to data published elsewhere. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article had already appeared in different form in other articles prior to its submission to International Journal of Molecular Medicine, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. The authors did not reply to indicate whether or not they agreed with the retraction of the paper. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published in International Journal of Molecular Medicine 42: 779-788, 2018; DOI: 10.3892/ijmm.2018.3660].

Retracted] MicroRNA-204 inhibits proliferation, migration, invasion and epithelial-mesenchymal transition in osteosarcoma cells via targeting Sirtuin 1

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that certain of the cell Transwell assay data in the article (featured in Figs. 3B and 6B) were strikingly similar to data that appearing in different form in another article by different authors at different research institutions, which had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article had already appeared in different form in another article prior to its submission to Oncology Reports, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. The authors did not reply to indicate whether or not they agreed with the retraction of the paper. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published on Oncology Reports 34: 399‑406, 2015; DOI: 10.3892/or.2015.3986].

Oncogenic role of epithelial cell transforming sequence 2 in lung adenocarcinoma cells.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.3892/etm.2016.3584.].

Retracted] Methylation‑induced downregulation and tumor-suppressive role of microRNA‑98 in glioma through targeting Sal‑like protein 4.

Following the publication of this paper, it was drawn to the Editors' attention by a concerned reader that certain of the cell Transwell assay data in the article (featured in Figs.4D and6D) were strikingly similar to data appearing in different form in other articles by different authors at different research institutions, which were already under consideration for publication or had already been published elsewhere at the time of the present article's submission. Owing to the fact that the contentious data in the above article had already appeared in different form in other articles prior to its submission to International Journal of Molecular Medicine, the Editor has decided that this paper should be retracted from the Journal. After having been in contact with the authors, they agreed with the decision to retract the paper. The Editor apologizes to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [the original article was published in International Journal of Molecular Medicine 41: 2651-2659, 2018; DOI: 10.3892/ijmm.2018.3464].

Questioning the Impact of the Impact Factor. A Brief Review and Future Directions

ABSTRACT Purpose: To provide a brief review of literature on the journal impact factors (JIF) and the newer research metrics being proposed or implemented. Methods: The authors performed a PubMed search of articles published in the English language on the journal impact factors. Data captured include historical perspectives, evolution, calculation, criticisms of JIF and their rebuttals, and organized efforts to address JIF issues, alternate research metrics, and future directions. Specific emphasis was laid on evaluating the criticisms, current lacunae, and the changing practice patterns. Results: One of the measures to assess the research impact of an article is the number of citations it receives. Hence, citation-based metrics are commonly used for such purposes. While editors and well-known scholars refrain from attributing article success to the journal’s prominence, the same is not true for most authors. JIF is still one of the top factors when deciding on an article submission. JIF is today an acceptable objective and quantifiable measure of knowledge dissemination. However, JIF should not be used as a surrogate measure to assess an individual researcher or an individual article. The reverence to JIF in this regard needs to be questioned. While alternate metrics or altmetrics have their advantages and limitations, they nevertheless augur well an era where scientometrics are complementary to one another without undue reliance on a sole parameter. Conclusion: While there is no need to demonize the JIF, its role in the scholarly assessment should be scaled down. The over-reliance and undue hype surrounding it should be discouraged at multiple scientific levels.

Has IMRD become IMRDi in management journals? Implications as an independent structural component of research articles

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to understand the practice of separating implications into separate sections or sub‐sections in scholarly articles that report empirical research in social sciences. Using a stratified random sampling strategy, I selected 120 articles from 40 journals in the field of management available via the Social Sciences Citation Index. I analysed the articles using qualitative content analysis that was guided by two research questions: (1) do journal articles include implications as an independent component? and (2) What guidance do journal editors provide about the presentation of implications in article submissions? The results show that 72% of articles separated implications into a section or sub‐section whilst the remaining 28% integrated them into other main sections. Of the first group, three quarters of authors separated implications into sub‐sections of the Discussion section and one quarter presented them as independent main sections that followed the Discussion. Several patterns related to the range, length, order, and type of implications sections and sub‐sections emerged. The results also showed that only 4% of journals mention implications in their guidelines for authors. Journal editors could use the results of this study to discuss the importance of implications to the journal strategic development, articulate their position on the article structure, and audit their guidelines. Researchers might use the study results to improve their article structure and, hence, increase chances of receiving positive editorial decision.

Quality of Literature Searches Published in Leading Neurosurgical Journals: A Review of Reviews.

There is mounting evidence that the search strategies upon which systematic reviews (SRs) are based frequently contain errors are incompletely reported or insensitive. To appraise the quality of search strategies in the 10 leading specialty neurosurgical journals and identify factors associated with superior searches. This research-on-research study systematically surveyed SRs published in the 10 leading neurosurgical journals between 01/10/2017 and 31/10/2019. All SRs were eligible for assessment using a predefined coding manual that was adapted from the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR), and Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. The PubMed interface was used to search the MEDLINE database, which was supplemented by individual journal searches. Descriptive statistics were utilized to identify factors associated with improved search strategies. A total of 633 articles were included and contained a median of 19.00 (2.00-1654.00) studies. Less than half (45.97%) of included search strategies were considered to be reproducible. Aggregated reporting score was positively associated with in-text reference to reporting guideline adherence (τb=0.156, P<.01). The number of articles retrieved by a search (τb=0.11, P<.01) was also associated with the reporting of a reproducible search strategy. This study demonstrates that the search strategies used in neurosurgical SRs require improvement. In addition to increasing awareness of reporting standards, we propose that this be achieved by the incorporation of PRISMA and other guidelines into article submission and peer-review processes. This may lead to the conduct of more informative SRs, which may result in improved clinician decision-making and patient outcomes.

Journal attitudes and outcomes of preprints in dermatology

The use of preprints, manuscripts that can be uploaded to a public server and made almost immediately available for public dissemination without peer review, is becoming increasingly common.1 Preprint servers are not typically associated with established peer-reviewed journals and often operate independently. Proponents of preprints point toward improved rapid dissemination of results and opportunities for crowdsourced feedback before submission to peer-reviewed journals.1 Conversely, inconsistent upload criteria among preprint servers (such as lack of guidance for reporting conflict of interest or image manipulation),1 and the risk for widespread discourse of non-peer reviewed results by news media may impinge on research integrity.2 As members of the public may not understand the difference between preprints and traditionally peer-reviewed articles, preprints have the potential to cause widespread confusion and mistrust.2 Use of preprints may also make publication of results in traditional journals more difficult, as the results may be perceived to be less novel. Despite controversy, the number of preprints continue to rise.3 There is limited understanding of how dermatology journals view and consider preprints. In this study, we explore dermatology journal policies toward the submission of preprint articles for publication, and corresponding publication outcomes of dermatology articles previously uploaded to a large clinically oriented preprint server.

Retractions in the Middle East from 1999 to 2018: a bibliometric analysis

This study investigated the retractions of academic research in the Middle East in the past two decades from a bibliometric perspective. A total of 563 retractions in the Middle East were identified in the examined span of time. Results showed that both the numbers of publications and retractions in the Middle East increased significantly in the past two decades. It was also found that 79.21% of the retractions were due to misconducts, of which plagiarism accounted for the largest proportion. In addition, the number of retractions by authors from a certain country accounted for almost half of all retractions. Last, most retractions were in medicine-related disciplines. Based on the results, we proposed suggestions to address the issue. Particularly, we suggest the use of technology in article submission systems as well as enhanced education on academic integrity to help address the issue of academic misconduct.

Editorial Volume 12 Issue 1 2021

Welcome to 2021. Despite the impact of COVID-19 across the tertiary education sector in 2020 (and continuing), we are pleased to be able to bring you our general issue for the year intact and without interruption. We are also reassured that our article submission rate remains constant despite the recent global disruption. The editorial team recognise that there has never been a more important time to share and disseminate current teaching and learning research. Authors are encouraged to submit research on practice that clearly identifies elements transferable to other domains and detail how a specific initiative contributes to the broader knowledge base. In this new COVID- normal learning environment, sharing learning and teaching initiatives in an open access forum has never been more valuable.

Editor's Letter: State of the Journal

As the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine (JUM), I am proud to provide this overview of the state of your journal. Last year (2020), JUM had arguably one of its best years on record, building on its reputation as the leading international educational and scientific journal for all fields of ultrasound. In 2020, JUM saw a significant increase in the number of original manuscript submissions. In fact, it was the first time JUM received more than 1500 submissions, ending the year with 1728—a 31.6% increase over 2019's record. Of course, this increase in submissions meant that JUM had to be more selective. The result is that the acceptance rate dipped to 17%, a record low. When it comes to deciding which articles are accepted, the editors and the article reviewers play a very important role. In addition to being able to immediately reject articles (you would be surprised by how many submitted articles do not even mention ultrasound), the editors select from a vast pool of reviewers to help score the merits of each article. The top reasons most articles are rejected are because they do not substantially add to the literature, they have a flawed study design, or the manuscript has translation issues. Of course, we also reject more articles than we would like because of academic misconduct or plagiarism. I would be remiss if I did not thank the hundreds of individuals who reviewed at least 1 article for JUM last year. While finding reviewers does tend to consume a significant amount of time, we did have some standouts last year. I am proud that 36 individuals reviewed at least 10 articles, 5 reviewed at least 20 articles, and Dr Giovanna Ferraioli reviewed an incredible 60 articles! In 2020, the Advisory Editorial Board completed 34% of all reviews with an average review time of just 9 days. JUM does not succeed without a strong Board, and as you can see, we are in good hands. As mentioned earlier, JUM is truly an international journal, with readership and authorship from across the globe. JUM received at least 10 article submissions from people in each of nearly 20 countries, with writers and researchers from 4 countries submitting at least 100 articles. A little more than one-fifth (20.4%) of all submissions came from the United States. The fact that JUM is global is also shown in the number of digital downloads. From around the world, readers and researchers downloaded 2.5 million articles from the JUM—a 39% increase over 2019. This increase in downloads and readership has also affected other metrics, including the impact factor, which increased to 1.759. In addition, JUM's h-index jumped to 31. This means 31 articles from the JUM were cited at least 31 times. In 2019, that number was 18. Other key metrics also saw improvement in 2020. The time to first decision dropped to 15 days, and the time from acceptance to online publication hit a record low of just 30 days. Just a few years ago, that took 216 days. I want to personally thank those who have made the journal flourish over the last few years, including the Deputy Editors, subspecialty editors, advisory editorial board members, the CME test writers and reviewers, the editorial staff, the peer review management staff, and the production staff. There is one person I want to single out: Bruce Totaro. Most of you do not know Bruce, but I can tell you he is one of the best technical editors on the planet. At the end of last year, after 20 years of working on the JUM, Bruce retired. While we certainly wish him the best of luck, he will be desperately missed. Thank you, Bruce. As you can see, it was an exciting year for JUM, and it took many people to make that happen. As we venture into 2021, there is even more on the horizon, including more focus on Early View articles, new virtual issues, enhancements to the JUM app (that you can find in the Apple App and Google Play stores), and more focused education. I look forward to an even bigger brighter future for JUM with your continued support.

Guest editorial

We continue the critical perspectives and conversations that critical perspectives on international business (cpoib) promotes by reflecting on the nature and impact of contemporary international business (IB) activities around the globe from inter-, trans- and multidisciplinary perspectives. The journal places a special emphasis on scholarly works that question the hegemony of multinational enterprises (MNEs) and that evaluate the effects of their IB activities on the global economy and national societies (cpoib, n.d.). Hence, for this special issue we invited submissions of articles that address the theme: “Do MNEs contribute to or reduce global inequality?”. Here, the term ‘inequality’ refers to various societal and economic phenomena inside or across nation states, such as income, gender, social class, economic conditions, and welfare.

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Single-blind single-blind peer review that reveals the author’s name to the reviewer, but hides the reviewer’s name from the author. Peer Review Process (Fig. 1) The article submission system is carried out through an international conference web, namely on the http://upincase.upy.ac.id. Articles submitted must follow the format (template) provided. Article submission terms are as follows.a) Articles submitted must be free from plagiarism elements.b) The submitted article is a work that has never been published in other media.c) Articles submitted are following the specified scope of the conference.The editor carries out this selection process by paying attention to the scientific field’s suitability between the article and the editor. Each article is selected by experts in their fields, according to their respective scientific fields, the articles that pass are excellent and quality articles. Articles that are declared to have passed according to predetermined criteria are then distributed to reviewers for input and improvement. Reviewer conducts a review process on submitted articles according to their field of expertise. Reviewers only provide suggestions and input to the editor on whether the article is worthy of publication or not.The review process is carried out using a single-blind review process system. A review process is carried out where the author does not know who the reviewer has reviewed the article. Meanwhile, the reviewer knows the name and affiliation of the authorFig. 1. Article Submission and Review ProcessAfter the review process is carried out and the article has received suggestions and input, the author must improve according to the suggestions and input. If it has been corrected, the author sends back the article to the editorial team for other presentations at the conference. The committee provides particular times for the coaching clinic to improve articles. Furthermore, the articles will be sent to the publisher to be published in an International Conference Proceedings (IOP).• Conference submission management system: Online via conference website http://upincase.upy.ac.id • Number of submissions received: 250 • Number of submissions sent for review: 240 • Number of submissions accepted: 172 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 68% • Average number of reviews per paper: 3 • Total number of reviewers involved: 30 • Any additional info on review process: • Contact person for queries (please include: name, affiliation, institutional email address) Marti Widya Sari Universitas PGRI Yogyakarta, Indonesia Email: widya@upy.ac.id