Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Journals.
Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Journals“
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Journals" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Howard, Louise, und Greg Wilkinson. „Impact factors of psychiatric journals“. British Journal of Psychiatry 170, Nr. 2 (Februar 1997): 109–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.170.2.109.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
BackgroundWe examined citation data for the British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP) and four other general psychiatry journals to assess their impact on the scientific community.MethodData on three measures of citations (total number of citations, impact factor and ranking by impact factor) were obtained from Journal Citation Reports for 1985–1994. Rank correlations from year to year were calculated.ResultsThe BJP currently ranks sixth of all psychiatry journals when journals are ranked by impact factor. The journal's impact factor fell between 1985 and 1990 and this was followed by a rise in impact factor after 1991. The BJP did not rank in the top 10 psychiatry journals between 1991 and 1993. Archives of General Psychiatry is cited more frequently than any other psychiatry journal, with the American Journal of Psychiatry usually ranking second. Psychopharmacology journals are replacing more general journals in the top rankings. Rankings of most journals have become less stable in recent years.ConclusionsThe BJP would have to change the nature and number of papers published to improve its impact factor. There are a number of limitations to citation data and such data are only one of several factors useful in evaluating the importance of a journal's contribution to scientific and clinical communities.Conflict of interestThese condauthor is Editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry.
2
Gotschall, Terri, Angela Spencer, Margaret A. Hoogland, Elisa Cortez und Elizabeth Irish. „Journals accepting case reports“. Journal of the Medical Library Association 111, Nr. 4 (02.10.2023): 819–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1747.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Few resources exist to support finding journals that accept case reports by specialty. In 2016, Katherine Akers compiled a list of 160 journals that accepted case reports, which many librarians continue to use 7 years later. Because journals’ editorial policies and submission guidelines evolve, finding publication venues for case reports poses a dynamic problem, consisting of reviewing a journal’s author guidelines to determine if the journal accepts case report manuscripts. This project aimed to create a more up to date and extensive list of journals that currently accept case reports. Case Presentation: 1,874 journal titles were downloaded from PubMed. The team reviewed each journal and identified journal titles that accept case reports. Additional inclusion factors included being indexed in MEDLINE, accessible on the internet, and accepting and publishing English language submissions. Discussion: The new journal list includes 1,028 journals covering 129 specialties and is available on the Open Science Framework public page.
3
Danielson, Morris G., und Jean L. Heck. „A research portfolio approach to evaluating finance journal quality“. Managerial Finance 42, Nr. 4 (11.04.2016): 338–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/mf-04-2015-0128.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to update and extend Danielson and Heck (2014) to provide additional evidence about the relative quality of a set of 23 high-impact finance journals. In particular, the paper summarizes the research records of all scholars contributing articles to each of the 23 journals from 1970 to 2014, and uses this information to identify journals that publish articles by similar sets of authors, and rank the 23 journals based upon publication activity from 2010 to 2014. Design/methodology/approach – The names of all authors appearing in each of the 23 journals during the 1970 to 2014 period – and the number of appearances by each author – were summarized directly from the journals’ table of contents. From this data, the lifetime (1970-2014) research portfolio of each journal’s average author was quantified for two sub-periods: 1970-2009 and 2010-2014. Using the assumption that a journal’s quality is positively related to its ability to attract submissions from accomplished researchers, this data provides information about the authors’ subjective ranking of finance journals and about how these rankings have changed during the past five years. Findings – The finance literature experienced rapid growth during 2010-2014, with almost 25 percent of all appearances from 1970 to 2014 occurring in the last five years of the period. Based upon publication activity during 2010-2014, the Journal of Finance, the Review of Financial Studies, the Journal of Financial Economics, and the Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis remain the most prestigious finance outlets, followed by the Financial Analysts Journal, the Journal of Financial Markets, Review of Finance, the Journal of Financial Intermediation, Financial Management, and the Journal of Applied Corporate Finance. Research limitations/implications – The identification of a unique set of the 23 “best” journals in any academic field is an inherently subjective task. Adding journals to (or removing journals from) this population could cause the ranking of some individual journals to shift. Originality/value – Evidence about the average quality of articles appearing in the leading finance journals is useful when evaluating faculty research records for purposes of tenure, promotion, and merit awards.
4
Oh, Kwangil. „Scientific journals should be transformed into science storytellers to improve their visibility“. Science Editing 8, Nr. 2 (20.08.2021): 193–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.6087/kcse.255.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
What is the objective for science journals to publish research papers? Would it be enough to collect research manuscripts and simply publish them in print or on the web? Science journal publishers have always strived to find ways of disseminating journal content to as many readers as possible. It is now time for science journal publishers to think about why a journal should be published; whether it is acceptable for valuable scientific findings to lie dormant in a journal’s archive; and whether traditional science communication is still effective. The present article suggests that science journals should transform themselves into science storytellers to improve the visibility and discoverability of their research findings. First, a new communication network between journals, authors, peers, the public, and policymakers is required. Second, conversion of media from academic language to plain language is critical to broadening the audience. Third, audio-visual content should be introduced into journal publishing to facilitate easy comprehension of the content. Fourth, research-focused channels, including EurekAlert, Medium, and social networking service channels are recommended as new media to propagate journals’ content to researchers. Improving visibility and discoverability is an urgent mission, especially for small society journals. To achieve this mission, science journals should be adapted to become storytellers and science communicators, as suggested above. A small society journal’s editor is not merely an editor, but an editor-publisher; therefore, editors should understand and take on this role.
5
AlRyalat, Saif Aldeen, Anas Abu Nassar, Faris Tamimi, Esraa Al-Fraihat, Lama Assaf, Razan Ghareeb, Mahmoud Masoudi und Mohammad Al-Essa. „The Impact of Open-Access Status on Journal Indices: Respiratory and Pulmonology Journals“. Current Respiratory Medicine Reviews 15, Nr. 1 (12.09.2019): 26–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1573398x15666190214154531.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Open access (OA) publishing is rapidly emerging in almost all disciplines, with variable intensity and effect on the discipline itself. The move toward OA is also observed in the field of respiratory and pulmonology, where both OA data repositories and OA journals are rapidly emerging. Objective: we aim to study the open-access status of respiratory and pulmonology journals and the impact of the open-access status on journal indices. Methods: We collected journal’s data from Scopus Source List on 1st of November 2018. We filtered the list for respiratory and pulmonology journals. Open Access Journals covered by Scopus are recognized as Open Access if the journal is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and/or the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources (ROAD). For each journal, we used several metrics to measure its strength, and then we compared these metrics between OA and non- OA journals. Results: There were 125 respiratory and pulmonology journals, a number that has increased by 12.6% since 2011. Moreover, the percentage of OA journals has increased from 21.6% to 26.4% during the same period. Non-OA journals have significantly higher scholarly output (p= 0.033), but OA journals have significantly higher percentage of citation (p= 0.05). Conclusion: Publishing in OA journals will yield a higher citation percentage compared to non-OA journals. Although this should not be the only reason to publish in an OA journal, it is still an important factor to decide where to publish.
6
M. Moskovkin, Vladimir, Emilia A. Bocharova und Oksana V. Balashova. „Journal benchmarking for strategic publication management and for improving journal positioning in the world ranking systems“. Campus-Wide Information Systems 31, Nr. 2/3 (23.06.2014): 82–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/cwis-11-2013-0066.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce and develop the methodology of journal benchmarking. Design/methodology/approach – The journal benchmarking method is understood to be an analytic procedure of continuous monitoring and comparing of the advance of specific journal(s) against that of competing journals in the same subject area, together with the application of best practices defined in order to improve a journal's own advance and gain a position among leading scientific journals. Findings – As a realization of this method, it is suggested to build up a journal scoreboard, which is a matrix of journal indicators, distributed for different journals. For the journal scoreboard on the subject of lasers and optics (36 journals, five indicators) a series of regression equations was built up that allow forecasts to be made for journals’ impact factor levels, depending on the International Collaboration and Reference per Document indicators included in the SCIMAGO database. Practical implications – The detailed journal scoreboard and prediction calculations allow elaborating strategies and policies for the promotion of journals in the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Originality/value – The research presents the building up of a journal scoreboard in combination with prediction calculations that can be helpful for improving journal positioning in international Scientometric databases.
7
Martin, Jason. „Research Quality and Newsworthiness of Published Articles are Partial Predictors of Journal Impact Factors“. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 7, Nr. 3 (13.09.2012): 90. http://dx.doi.org/10.18438/b85022.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Objective – Determine what characteristics of a journal’s published articles can be used to predict the journal impact factor (JIF).
Design – A retrospective cohort study.
Setting – The researchers are located at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Subjects – The sample consisted of 1,267 clinical research articles from 103 evidence based and clinical journals which were published in 2005 and indexed in the McMaster University Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS) database and those same journals’ JIF from 2007.
Method – The articles were divided 60:40 into a derivation set (760 articles and 99 journals) and a validation set (507 articles and 88 journals). Ten variables which could influence JIF were developed and a multiple linear regression was run on the derivation set and then applied to the validation set.
Main Results – The four variables found to be significant were the number of databases which indexed the journal, the number of authors, the quality of research, and the “newsworthiness” of the journal’s published articles.
Conclusion – The quality of research and newsworthiness at time of publication of a journal’s articles can predict the journal impact factor with 60% accuracy.
8
Grydehøj, Adam, und Ping Su. „The price of freedom: Open access, editorial labour, and prestige in academic publishing“. Island Studies Journal 18, Nr. 1 (2023): 285–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.24043/isj.422.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper discusses tensions in journal editing and management, particularly for non-fee charging open access (diamond open access) journals. Even diamond open access journals and other journals published on a non-commercial basis are subject to financial and labour costs. Because diamond open access journals do not gain income from subscriptions or article processing charges (APCs), every published paper presents additional costs. Whereas commercially published journals depend upon substantial free academic labour, unfunded or underfunded diamond open access journals depend upon both substantial free academic labour and free non-academic labour. This encourages editors to be selective about the kinds of submissions on which they spend their time. The importance of maintaining a journal’s prestige, as measured through inclusion in bibliometric indices, incentivises further selectivity. Different kinds of papers are suitable for different kinds of journals. Even publications like Island Studies Journal that are radically accessible to authors and readers in diverse financial circumstances must make difficult choices when deciding what material to publish.
9
Maphosa, Mfowabo. „Fifteen years of The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning: A review and bibliometric analysis“. Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning 18, Nr. 1 (31.05.2023): 150–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/ijtl.v18i1.17179.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The rise of academic publishing due to the ‘publish or perish’ phenomenon has placed increased scrutiny on African scholars. The limited footprint of African scholars in international open-access journals has led to a drive for Africa to produce and disseminate its research. Publication analytics has become an essential strategy for journals for managing journals. This study uses bibliometric metrics to explore the publications metrics of the Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, an open-access journal in South Africa. The study analyses bibliometric data from its articles published between 2008 and 2022. The study highlights the research clusters, themes and hotspots in the journal. This study helps obtain a snapshot of the journal’s status. The paper illustrates the development trends of the journal, which provides an essential reference for the future development of this and other similar journals. The journal has made a significant impact on the education landscape in South Africa.
10
Pratama, Mohammad Rizki Fadhil. „Comparison of language used for journal names indexed in SINTA ranked 1 and 2“. Publishing Letters 1, Nr. 2 (04.07.2021): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.48078/publetters.v1i2.13.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
For new journals, choosing the right name is very important. Apart from attracting the interest of authors and readers, the journal's name also determines the accreditation and indexation process. In addition to using names in national and international languages, the use of a combination of more than one type of language is also commonly used as journal names. This short communication aims to describe the names of journals in Indonesia indexed by Science and Technology Index (SINTA) at rank 1 and 2 regarding the language used. The method used is identifying journal names one by one on the SINTA journal page https://sinta.ristekbrin.go.id/journals at rank 1 and 2, followed by identification of the language used as the journal name. The results obtained show that journals at SINTA 1 rank the most used English names with 74.39%, while in SINTA rank 2, the most use Indonesian names with 57.19%.
11
Serenko, Alexander, und Nick Bontis. „Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: 2017 update“. Journal of Knowledge Management 21, Nr. 3 (08.05.2017): 675–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jkm-11-2016-0490.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking of 27 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals. Design/methodology/approach The ranking was developed based on a combination of results from a survey of 482 active KM/IC researchers and journal citation impact indices. Findings The ranking list includes 27 currently active KM/IC journals. The A+ journals are the Journal of Knowledge Management and the Journal of Intellectual Capital. The A journals are the Learning Organization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Knowledge and Process Management, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems and International Journal of Knowledge Management. A majority of recently launched journals did not fare well in the ranking. Whereas a journal’s longevity is important, it is not the only factor affecting its ranking position. Expert survey and citation impact measures are relatively consistent, but expert survey ranking scores change faster. Practical implications KM/IC discipline stakeholders, including practitioners, editors, publishers, reviewers, researchers, students, administrators and librarians, may consult the developed ranking list for various purposes. Compared to 2008, more researchers indicated KM/IC as their primary area of concentration, which is a positive indicator of discipline development. Originality/value This is the most recent ranking list of KM/IC academic journals.
12
Schönfelder, Nina. „Article processing charges: Mirroring the citation impact or legacy of the subscription-based model?“ Quantitative Science Studies 1, Nr. 1 (Februar 2020): 6–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00015.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
With the ongoing open-access transformation, article processing charges (APCs) are gaining importance as one of the main business models for open-access publishing in scientific journals. This paper analyzes how much of APC pricing can be attributed to journal-related factors. With UK data from OpenAPC (which aggregates fees paid for open-access articles by universities, funders, and research institutions), APCs are explained by the following variables: (a) the “source normalized impact per paper” (SNIP), (b) whether the journal is open access or hybrid, (c) the publisher of the journal, (d) the subject area of the journal, and (e) the year. The results of the multivariate linear regression show that the journal’s impact and hybrid status are the most important factors for the level of APCs. However, the relationship between APC and SNIP is different for open-access journals and hybrid journals. APCs paid to open-access journals were found to be strongly increasing in conjunction with higher journal citation impact, whereas this relationship was observed to be much looser for articles in hybrid journals. This paper goes beyond simple statistics, which have been discussed so far in the literature, by using control variables and applying statistical inference.
13
Menz, Hylton B. „Publication Patterns and Perceptions of the Australian Podiatric Medical Faculty“. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 91, Nr. 4 (01.04.2001): 210–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.7547/87507315-91-4-210.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Despite the wide range of publication opportunities in podiatric medicine, little is known about how podiatric authors select journals in which to publish or their perceptions of journals currently available. To investigate these issues, a survey of publication patterns and perceptions of full- and part-time academic staff members at podiatric medical schools in Australia was undertaken. Most of the papers by Australian podiatric medical faculty members have been published in “local” journals, such as the Australasian Journal of Podiatric Medicine (38%) and the British Journal of Podiatry (17%). However, an increasing number of papers are being published in JAPMA (14%). In addition, a large proportion of papers have been published in a variety of journals that are not specific to podiatric medicine, particularly in the areas of biomechanics and diabetic medicine. The number of publications per faculty member was associated with the highest qualification obtained, academic rank, and the number of years of employment in higher education. The most important factors in selecting the journal in which to publish were the journal’s inclusion in MEDLINE, the perceived prestige of the journal, and the quality of the journal’s peer-review panel and editor. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 91(4): 210-218, 2001)
14
Peters, Kim, Kevin Daniels, Gerard P. Hodgkinson und S. Alexander Haslam. „Experts’ Judgments of Management Journal Quality“. Journal of Management 40, Nr. 7 (09.02.2012): 1785–812. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206311434532.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Many lists that purport to gauge the quality of journals in management and organization studies (MOS) are based on the judgments of experts in the field. This article develops an identity concerns model (ICM) that suggests that such judgments are likely to be shaped by the personal and social identities of evaluators. The model was tested in a study in which 168 editorial board members rated 44 MOS journals. In line with the ICM, respondents rated journal quality more highly to the extent that a given journal reflected their personal concerns (associated with having published more articles in that journal) and the concerns of a relevant ingroup (associated with membership of the journal’s editorial board or a particular disciplinary or geographical background). However, judges’ ratings of journals in which they had published were more favorable when those journals had a low-quality reputation, and their ratings of journals that reflected their geographical and disciplinary affiliations were more favorable when those journals had a high-quality reputation. The findings are thus consistent with the view that identity concerns come to the fore in journal ratings when there is either a need to protect against personal identity threat or a meaningful opportunity to promote social identity.
15
Panda, Abinash, Bulu Maharana und Satya Ranjan Sahu. „Dynamics of Scientometrics Indicators in three distinct Physics Journals with long publication history“. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management 17, Nr. 1 (2023): 191–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.47974/cjsim-2022-0067.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Core journals in any subject go through evolution processes before being accepted worldwide. The study of the journal’s evolution with its long publication history gives insight into distinct characteristics acquired over time. This study explores the dynamics in scientometrics indicators of three distinct Physics journals with the same scope but published from different regions and impact factors. The result shows each journal has its discrete contributors, but the host or home country contributes more than 50%. In short or medium duration (decadal), the increase in authorship per article differs from journal to journal. Still, the change is approximately the same over a longer duration (1990-2019) (46.38% to 48.5%). A journal with linear authorship growth only correlates significantly with its impact factor (r = 0.877). These journals also show an increase in international coauthored publications, but the increase mostly depends on the host country’s collaborations. More than 80% of associations are between two countries. The findings establish that irrespective of Physics’s global use and implications, the researchers tend to publish in familiar journals from their region regardless of impact factors. The journals with higher impact factors publish more transnational articles.
16
Besancenot, Damien, João Ricardo Faria und Franklin G. Mixon. „Academic Research and the Strategic Interaction of Scholars and Editors: A Two-Stage Game“. International Game Theory Review 19, Nr. 01 (März 2017): 1650010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0219198916500109.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper presents a two-stage game in order to explore the strategic interaction between the editor of an academic journal and a representative scholar. At the outset of the game, the editor chooses the “characteristics” of the journal, which encompass its rejection rate and other facets of the journal’s profile. Next, the scholar decides whether or not to submit a paper to the journal. We show that scholars’ behavior precludes the possibility of low-quality journals. As such, editors have only the choice between managing high-quality journals with few issues or second-tier journals publishing many papers. Moreover, if our two-stage game suggests that higher costs for scholars contribute to journal quality, numerical simulation shows that the effect of these costs on journal quality may be low. Lastly, our game-theoretic approach points out that it is difficult for journal editors to define optimal rejection rates.
17
Kokowski, Michał. „„Wykazy czasopism MNiSW 2017 i 2019”, „ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017” a polskie czasopisma z historii nauki, historii, filozofii nauki oraz naukoznawstwa“. Studia Historiae Scientiarum 18 (15.11.2019): 505–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.19.015.11021.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
W artykule przedstawiono wyniki ewaluacji czasopism z historii nauki, historii, filozofii nauki oraz naukoznawstwa na podstawie „Wykazu czasopism MNiSW 2017”, „Wykazu czasopism MNiSW 2019” oraz „ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017”. Dodano także komentarz do tych wyników. Zwrócono uwagę na następujące fakty: a) fakt istnienia ujemnej korelacji między oceną czasopisma w „Wykazie czasopism MNiSW 2019” a oceną czasopisma na „ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017” dla czasopism z historii i historii nauki; b) fakt, że obecność czasopisma w DOAJ nie podniosła oceny ministerialnej czasopisma; c) fakt, że ocena czasopisma w bazie danych Scopus nie wpłynęła w znaczący sposób na wzrost oceny ministerialnej: ocena ta zależy od dyscypliny i subdyscypliny; d) fakt, że czasopisma z listy programu ministerialnego „Wsparcie dla czasopism naukowych 2019–2020” (WCN 2019–2020) oraz ERIH+ otrzymały od 20 do 70 punktów; ich ministerialna ocena zależy od dyscypliny i subdyscypliny. Ponadto wyrażono nadzieję, że dla dobra polskiej nauki w krótkim czasie usunięte zostaną pewne błędy „Wykazu czasopism MNiSW 2019”, gdyż niektóre czasopisma otrzymały nieadekwatne oceny (stwierdzenie to wynika z porównania dokonań czasopism, w tym wskaźników bibliometrycznych). “Lists of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland 2017 & 2019”, “ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017”, and the Polish journals on the history of science, history, philosophy of science and science of science Abstract The article presents the results of the evaluation of the Polish journals from the history of science, history, philosophy of science, and science of science, based on the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland 2017 & 2019” and “ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017”. A comment has also been added to these results. The following facts were noted: a) the fact that there is a negative correlation between the journal’s rating in the “List of journals MNiSW 2019” and the journal’s ratings in the “ICI Journal Master List 2014–2017” for journals from the history and history of science; b) the fact that the presence of the journal in the DOAJ does not raise the ministerial rating of the journal; c) the fact that the evaluation of the journal in the Scopus database has not significantly affected the increase in the ministerial rating: the rating depends on the discipline and sub-discipline; d) the fact that journals from the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020” (WCN 2019–2020) and ERIH+ received 20 to 70 points; their ministerial ratings depend on discipline and sub-discipline. In addition, it was hoped that for the good of Polish science, some errors of the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” would be removed in a short time, as some magazines received too low marks (this statement results from a comparison of journals’ achievements, including bibliometric indicators).
18
PEKCOŞKUN, Tuğçe, Kadri KIRAN und Cem UZUN. „Role of Language Criteria in the Sustainability of Scientific Journals: Analysis of Psychiatry Journals in Türkiye“. Psikiyatride Guncel Yaklasimlar - Current Approaches in Psychiatry 15, Supplement 1 (17.12.2023): 464–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1330505.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The dominance of English in scientific papers and the use of English in locally funded research may hinder local comprehension and raise concerns about transitioning from vernacular languages to a universal language in scholarly journals. Additionally, the impact of publication language on journal sustainability is an intriguing area requiring further investigation. This study investigated how the publication languages of 42 Turkish psychiatric journals published between 2010-2023 impact journal sustainability. It examined the effect of publication languages and language changes on sustainability by analyzing information from the DergiPark platform, TR Index, and journal websites. Among the analyzed journals, 8 have ceased publication, while 34 continue. The terminated journals include 3 with Turkish articles, 2 with English articles, and 3 with both Turkish and English articles. Among the 34 ongoing journals in 2023, 3 only accepts Turkish publications, 8 only accept English publications, 22 accept both Turkish and English publications, and 1 accepts both Turkish and English versions of each article. The Turkish-only journal is not indexed by any major indexes. Of the eight English-only journals, one is SCI-Expanded and TR Index, three are indexed by TR Index and DOAJ, three are indexed by TR Index and one is not indexed by any major index. Among the 22 journals publishing in both languages, one is indexed by all the major indexes, four by TR Index and DOAJ, two by DOAJ and six by TR Index only, nine are not indexed by any major index. The use of the local language in journal publications may adversely affect the journal's sustainability, but it is not solely determined by indexing and citation in major index. Furthermore, publishing in English does not guarantee citations from international journals or ensure the long-term viability of the journal.
19
Dias, Nelson Wellausen. „The growing international relevance of Ambiente & Água according to Scopus CiteScore results“. Ambiente e Agua - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Science 16, Nr. 4 (02.08.2021): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2670.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Ambiente & Água Journal has adopted strategies in recent years to increase its relevance within the international scientific community. The results of CiteScore, recently released for the triennium ending in 2020, indicate that the journal’s strategies are starting to show good results. Evidence of an increase in the proportion between the number of citations received versus the number of documents published is corroborated by the impact indicators from other sources, such as the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) and Leiden University’s Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) Impact per Publication (IPP). Also positive is the fact that the journal's impact is increasing even with the increase in the number of papers published, contrary to the strategy adopted by some journals that limit the number of papers in order to increase the journal's impact.
20
Pulikowski, Arkadiusz. „The Relation Between the Structure of Abstracts in LIS and Anthropology Journals and Their Rank“. Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej - Studia Informacyjne 58, Nr. 1(115) (24.06.2020): 24–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.36702/zin.645.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose/Thesis: The study determines: (1) which of the commonly expected elements of abstracts feature in library and information science (LIS) and anthropology journals; (2) whether there is a relationship between the journal rank as measured by the Impact Factor and the number of components present in the journal’s abstracts.Approach/Methods: The research had two main stages. Firstly, the scope of research was determined by selecting specific disciplines and journals. Secondly, randomly selected abstracts were analyzed to see if the key components were present. Results and conclusions: The key abstract components (background, purposes, methods, results) do not vary across the journals from both disciplines. In general, the abstracts from journals of higher rank are longer than those from journals of lower rank and have more components present. The results were proven for LIS and anthropology but the pattern may hold true for journals from other disciplines. This requires further research.Originality/Value: The study extends prior research by correlating the completeness of information included in abstracts with journal rank measured by Impact Factor.
21
Khan, Umar Ali. „Necessity of Framing Virtuous Journal Policies for Attaining High Impact Citations“. Isra Medical Journal 14, Nr. 1 (30.03.2022): 1–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.55282/imj.ed59.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the era of modern science and technology research has been given great significance. This will be only possible in light of accurate results extracted from good quality published researches in reputed journals. To ensure quality standard maintenance of medical journals, recommended international guidelines by International Committee for Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) must be followed. All these will be emphasize various steps for publications i.e. pre submission phase, submission phase, publication proceedings and post publication phase. The ICMJE and WAME is comprised of a group of medical journal editors and the legislatures of associated organizations. They focus to refine the recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals.1,2 While aim of COPE is to focus on publication ensuring maintenance of all ethical rights of subjects and patients especially in line with Helsinki declaration.3-5 Following and strict adherence to all these will be helpful to achieve good Global ranking of a journal. This will be done by SC Imago Journal Rank (SJR) which is an internationally recognized standard for recognizing the quartile (Q) of a journal. All the mile stones for this ranking and quartile demarcation, includes the overall number of published manuscripts, total number of citations, and average citations per week. Regarding quartiles, they helps in journal’s ranking for impact factor or impact index. Q1 comprises of upper 25% of journals in the gradient, Q2 involves journals in next 25 to 50% group, Q3 includes journals between 50 to 75% groups. While Q4 is occupied by group of journals between 75 to 100%. The esteemed journals of specific discipline are usually the ones which can occupy first quartile, Q1.6 In light of ICMJE, WAME and COPE guidelines, following can be the plan to uplift a medical journal in view to make it a Q1 journal;1-3 There must be clarity for each an ever policy to run a medical journal in successful way. Highlighted amongst those policies includes finalization of journal’s name reflecting the content to be published. Then comes establishment of editorial board i.e. editor in chief, associate editors, assistant editors, advisory board, statistician, English language expert and team for plagiarism and software handling. The editors should be highly reputed individuals who are capable of making decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of an article. He should have the ability to work as a team, because he is the one to regular involve author’s reviewers and publishers in the process of printing the journal.
22
Østergaard, Poul Alberg, Henrik Lund, Rasmus Magni Johannsen, Karl Sperling und Neven Duic. „Ten years of sustainable energy planning and management“. International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management 40 (02.04.2024): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.54337/ijsepm.8360.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
With this volume 40 the International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management can celebrate its 10 years anniversary. In this editorial we take a closer look at the journals impact over its first 10 years of existence and highlight the articles that have made the largest impacts in the scientific community from a citation perspective. The topic of the journal – sustainable energy planning and management – has not decreased in importance over the first ten years of the journal’s existence – and fortunately the results published in the journal has garnered interest and the impact of the journal has significantly increased. In terms of citation, the journals 275 published articles, has received 1484 citations as per March 2024 and nine articles have 40 or more citations in Scopus. CiteScore ranks the journal in the top 10% out of 700+ journals within the topic of Geography, Planning and Development.
23
Kim, Sang-Jun, und Kay Sook Park. „Influence of open access journals on the research community in Journal Citation Reports“. Science Editing 8, Nr. 1 (20.02.2021): 32–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.6087/kcse.227.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose: The number of open access (OA) journals is rapidly increasing, and it is very important for librarians to understand the influence of OA journals on the research community. This study investigated the influence of the OA journals listed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) based on various indicators.Methods: The data for this study were prepared by combining the JCR 2014 to 2019 journal list with the number of hybrid OA articles obtained by searching the Web of Science. Each journal’s JCR indicators and article processing charge were added. The influence of OA journals was compared according to OA type, whether they were published by large publishers, and whether they were top gold OA journals.Results: Gold OA journals remained weaker in terms of JCR indicators than hybrid journals. However, the top 20 gold OA journals, accounting for 27.0% of all OA articles in JCR 2014 to 2019, were superior in all JCR indicators. The top three OA publishers (MDPI, BioMed Central, and Public Library of Science) showed potential for development despite concerns regarding poor journals. The top three subscription publishers were very active in OA publishing, but their actual share of hybrid OA articles (Elsevier, 5.1%; Springer, 10.1%; and Wiley, 12.4% in JCR 2019) was still insufficient.Conclusion: Some gold OA journals showed high competitiveness and even the possibility for development beyond traditional journals. The transition of subscription journals to hybrid journals was found to be at the early stage. In light of these findings, librarians should continue monitoring the influence of OA journals.
24
Freitas, Denise de. „JOURNAL ANALYSIS ON OPHTHALMOLOGY AND OTHERS“. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões 42, suppl 1 (2015): 70–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-69912015s01025.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Objective: To update knowledge and methods to access and view the journals included in Qualis of CAPES Medicine III, and how to measure the impact factor. Method: Document review on the attempt to verify the way Qualis uses for ranking journals cited by the post-graduate programs of Medicine III in their evaluation periods, and the impact factors obtained by journals indexing base. Results: The classification is annual and are ranking in strata ranging from A1, the highest, and A2; B1; B2; B3; B4; B5; C. The latter has zero evaluation weight. These strata take as reference the impact factor of the journals listed by the programs. The same journal can be classified into different Qualis in other areas, and this is no inconsistency, but expressed the assigned value, in each area, at that particular journal. The Impact Factor is measured using the Journal of Citation Report in Web of Knowledge website. Conclusion: Using the criteria established by WebQualis for stratification of journals there is a quality guidance of what is produced by the program and, based on it, can be made scientific comparison of program performance. Consulting the JCR is recommended because it defines exactly what is the journal's impact factor; Qualis stratifies numerical intervals and not individual journal specificity.
25
Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A. „Caution with Journal Selection: Spam, Copycat Journals, and Predatory Publishing“. BioScientific Review 6, Nr. 2 (16.05.2024): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.32350/bsr.62.i.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The modern scholarly journal is currently faced with the challenge of upholding its principles in order to attract a continuous stream of authors to maintain its publishing status. Further, it also needs to be weary of unscrupulous players (including competitors) lurking in the global knowledge stream that pose an existential threat by diverting academics away from legitimate journals using underhanded or unfair practices, such as the use of spam or journals that employ copycat names. It is not always easy to distinguish predatory from exploitative journals, or underhanded from unfair practices, and even the use of or reliance on publishing blacklists does not offer potential authors a safe selection of journals to publish in. Authors and journals thus live in a volatile publishing environment in which they are confronted with constant threats. In biomedicine, these can translate into reputational damage to the journal and publisher if fake science or pseudoscience is published, since it puts at stake the journal’s reliability for biomedical information. For authors, particularly younger or less experienced ones whose careers depend on publishing advances, a mistake such as making a submission to a hijacked or copycat journal that impersonates the original journal may carry long-term negative reputational consequences. So, such a decision can be career altering.
26
Beshyah, Salem A. „Authors’ Selection of Target Journals and Their Attitudes to Emerging Journals: A survey from two developing regions“. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal [SQUMJ] 19, Nr. 1 (30.05.2019): 51. http://dx.doi.org/10.18295/squmj.2019.19.01.010.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Objectives: This study aimed to assess the factors that influence authors' decision when choosing a journal for publication and to assess authors' attitudes and practices regarding emerging journals. Methods:cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted between April and July 2017 at Dubai Medical College, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on a convenience sample of 2,764 healthcare professionals. Results: A total of 250 responses were received (response rate: 9%) and 152 valid respondents were included in this study (5.6%), of which the majority were male (61.2%) and aged 41–60 years (68%) from the Middle East and Africa. Most respondents (88.8%) had medical and/or dental qualifications and the majority were in senior clinical (55%) and academic (71.5%) positions. More than half of the respondents (62.5%) had published at least one article in the previous five years. Results showed that journal impact factor (JIF), indexation status, free submission and being international were important among respondents. Based on the respondents that shared their encounters with emerging journals (n = 114), 62 respondents (54.4%) regularly read certain emerging journals, 51 (44.7%) had been a peer-reviewer, 48 (42.1%) had cited content from an emerging journal at least once and 45 (39.5%) had published in emerging journals. Only 18 respondents (14.2%) were not convinced with the need for emerging journals and believed that all researchers should compete for publication in the same international journals. Conclusion: Selection of target journals is driven mainly by JIF, indexation status, free submission and a journal’s international status. A diverse range of opinions and attitudes regarding emerging journals were observed in this study. Keywords: Journal Impact Factor; Open Access Publishing; Editorial Policy; Peer Review; Indexing; Publications; Attitude; United Arab Emirates.
27
Lee, Young Jin, Dae In Kim, Heayoung Kim, Jooyoung Kim, Ju Hun Lee, Eun-Ae Jung, Soonjin Ji, Jiyeon Lee und Jung Mi Park. „Analysis of Editorial and Publication Trends of SCIE Listed Medical Journals – Based on Registered Journals at Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors“. Journal of Korean Medical Library Association 43, Nr. 1_2 (Dezember 2016): 15–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.69528/jkmla.2016.43.1_2.15.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The purpose of this study was to analyze the publishing and editing trends of medical journals listed in the Science Citation Index Expendence (SCIE). Based on this study enhance and develop the future direction of Journal of Korean Medical Library Association. The target journal covers 34 journals published in 2015, registered in the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editor (KAMJE). Based on the journal’s homepage, collection of current issue, submission policies and other criteria related on management of the journal was used for data. Category for analysis is the following. the Editorial Board, Journal Policy, Title and Copyright Page, Instructions for Authors, Manuscript Style Guide, Online Availability. The goals is to determine the current state of the Korean Medical Library Association based on the analysis item. The main results are 97% of the Editorial Board is organized multi-nationally, 100% of academic journals are published on-time, 80% has a English guide for Publication Ethics of ICMJE and KAMJE, 97% of journals Title and Copyright Page are in English, 100% has a guide on Instructions for Author for peer reviewer’ examination process, 79% has a formatted Manuscript Style Guide for abstract and article, 100% are publish according to manuscript, 100% has a English journal web site, and 79% have access of fulltext from first issue to current. International academic journals must adhere to the research and publication ethics and ensure that the editorial board is composed of multi-nationally academic experts. The publication of the journals issue must be ontime. Online availability must be enhanced through the independent homepage of the journal include access for fulltext papers and online submission systems.
28
Ellinger, Alexander E., und Karen Chapman. „IJPDLM’s 45th anniversary: a retrospective bibliometric analysis and future directions“. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 46, Nr. 1 (08.02.2016): 2–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijpdlm-12-2015-0301.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose – After 40 years, IJPDLM received its first impact factor from Web of Science in 2010. This anniversary editorial provides a retrospective bibliometric assessment of IJPDLM over its initial five years as a Web of Science journal (2011-2015). First, IJPDLM’s citation metrics are compared to those for the Web of Science journal subject category of Management. Next, IJPDLM’s most cited articles, best papers and special issues together with the international diversity of the journal’s author base from 2011 to 2015 are reviewed. The analysis also presents the journals that cite IJPDLM most frequently, as well as the journals most frequently cited in IJPDLM. Finally, IJPDLM is compared to peer journals in the logistics and SCM field on various scholarly metrics including impact factor, five-year impact factor, h5-index, number of citations received and self-citation rate. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – Retrospective bibliometric analysis of IJPDLM from 2011 to 2015. Findings – Boosted by the journal’s admission to Web of Science in 2010, IJPDLM has made steady progress toward fulfilling the mission of providing its constituents with timeliness, inclusiveness and impact. Practical implications – The comparison of IJPDLM’s scholarly metrics with those of peer journals and journals in the Web of Science Management category will be of interest and value to logistics and SCM researchers. Originality/value – The retrospective overview and celebration of IJPDLM’s progress over the last five years and future directions will be of interest to the journal’s stakeholders and prospective authors.
29
Timalsina, Saroj Kumar, und Janta Raj Karki. „Academic Concern: Identify Predatory Journals Prior to Publication“. ILAM इलम 20, Nr. 1 (04.07.2024): 30–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ilam.v20i1.67307.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This article was composed with the goal of identifying predatory journals and making recommendations to aspiring academics. In this course, the author gathered the essential material through deskwork and then utilized descriptive-cum-analytical methods to generalize the findings. This article discusses how to discover predatory and non-predatory journals on Web pages so that careful researchers can publish their scholarly work in the right forum. To provide the necessary explanation, the author employed both descriptive and analytical approaches to information comprehension. According to the study, predatory journals are widely available in the form of open-access journals and online journals, whereas non-predatory publications have well-defined manuscript submission protocols. That is why interested researchers should be aware of whether they are reading the correct journal or a counterfeit. When examining a suspected journal, look for integrity; if the same paper appears in many journals without peer review and there is no editor or editorial board listed on the journal's website at all, Topics covered include the website, publication methods, indexing and metrics, pricing, access and copyright, and commercial activities. This is why this post will be useful for those who want to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit journals.
30
Na Takuathung, Mingkwan, Wannachai Sakuludomkan, Supanimit Teekachunhatean und Nut Koonrungsesomboon. „Characteristics and Research Techniques Associated with the Journal Impact Factor and Other Key Metrics in Pharmacology Journals“. Computation 9, Nr. 11 (05.11.2021): 116. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/computation9110116.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the present age, there is intense pressure on researchers to publish their research in ‘high-impact factor’ journals. It would be interesting to understand the trend of research publications in the field of pharmacology by exploring the characteristics of research articles, including research techniques, in relation to the journal’s key bibliometrics, particularly journal impact factor (JIF), the seemingly most mentioned metric. This study aimed to determine the characteristics and research techniques in relation to research articles in pharmacology journals with higher or lower JIF values. A cross-sectional study was conducted on primary research journals under the ‘Pharmacology and Pharmacy’ category. Analysis of 768 original research articles across 32 journals (with an average JIF of 2.565 ± 0.887) demonstrated that research studies involving molecular techniques, in vivo experiments on animals, and bioinformatics and computational modeling were significantly associated with a higher JIF value of the journal in which such contributions were published. Our analysis suggests that research studies involving such techniques/approaches are more likely to be published in higher-ranked pharmacology journals.
31
Ward, Shaelyn, Logan Corwin, Jacob Duncan, Caleb Smith, Danya Brewer, Griffin Hughes und Matt Vassar. „ANALYSIS OF REPORTING GUIDELINE AND TRIAL REGISTRATION POLICIES AMONG GERIATRIC JOURNALS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY“. Innovation in Aging 7, Supplement_1 (01.12.2023): 719. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igad104.2331.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The use of reporting guidelines and clinical trial registration policies by academic journals reduces bias and improves transparency in clinical research. It is unknown whether geriatric and gerontology journals mention, recommend, or require their use for the studies they may potentially publish. The purpose of this study is to assess the submission guidelines of the top geriatric and gerontology journals for their editorial recommendation or requirement of predetermined reporting guidelines and clinical trial registration. We identified the top 100 journals in the “Geriatrics and Gerontology” subcategory using the 2021 Scopus CiteScore tool. We probed each journal’s “Instructions to Authors” for statements regarding reporting guidelines for popular study designs and extracted them as “Not Mentioned”, “Recommended”, “Does Not Require”, or “Required”. Further, we classified each journal’s reference to clinical trial registration in a similar manner. Of the 100 examined journals included in our analysis, the QUOROM statement was not mentioned by any journals, whereas the CONSORT statement (44/100, 44%) was mentioned and recommended/required the most often. PRISMA guidelines were not mentioned by 57 journals (57/100,57%). Furthermore, 45 journals (45/100,45%) did not mention study registration. Therefore, the recommendation or requirement of reporting guidelines and clinical trial registration in the top 100 geriatric and gerontology journals is inconsistent. Journal editors should strongly recommend that author’s follow validated reporting guidelines to reduce potential bias and improve transparency in the articles they publish.
32
Astvansh, Vivek, und Ethan Fridmanski. „Academic business research: Impact on academics versus impact on practice“. PLOS ONE 18, Nr. 12 (06.12.2023): e0289034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289034.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Business journalists and editors of academic business journals have lamented that academic research has little use for any nonacademic stakeholders, including companies, nonprofits, regulators, and governments. Although emotionally unsettling, these commentaries are bereft of evidence on how well a journal’s academic impact (measured by impact factor) translates into practice impact. The authors provide this evidence. Specifically, they sample 56 journals, spanning 12 business disciplines, from 2000 to 2020. For each journal-year, they measure two- and five-year impact factor, which proxies the impact on academics. Next, for each article published in each journal-year, they collect attention score—a weighted sum of the number of times the article is cited in 19 types of practitioner outlets—from Altmetric. The authors then measure the correlation coefficient between the impact factor and attention score for each journal in periods of two-year and five-year. The coefficient indicates how well the journal’s academic impact has translated into practice impact. Among the 12 disciplines, international business discipline tops the chart, while information systems, accounting, and finance occupy the bottom positions. American Economic Review leads the 56 journals, with Journal of Marketing Research and California Management Review as close followers. The findings highlight the impact of academic business research—or the lack thereof.
33
Kokowski, Michał. „Evolutionary transformation of the journal. Part 7“. Studia Historiae Scientiarum 19 (30.09.2020): 13–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.4467/2543702xshs.20.001.12557.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article outlines the seventh phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). The information is provided on the following matters: the realization of the ministerial program “Support for scientific journals 2019–2020”, the evaluation of the journal in “ICI Master Journal List 2018” (published at the end of 2019), in Scimago Journal Ranks 2019 (published on 11 June 2020), in CWTS Journal Indicators (published on the beginning of June 2020) and in Scopus (published on 6 June 2020), a systemic obstacle in the further developing of the journal related to the journal’s underrated rating in the “List of journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Polish Republic 2019” (published on 31 July 2019 and 18 December 2020), the indexation of the journal in the Scopus database (from September 2019), the works on updating the journal’s website in OJS (3.1.2.), and the number of foreign authors and the number of reviewers of the current volume of the journal.
34
Mzhelsky, A. A. „Data and reproducibility. Interpretation of international guidelines and journals’ best policies and practices“. Science Editor and Publisher 7, Nr. 2 (14.04.2023): 143–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.24069/sep-22-53.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Relevance. The 2022 Update of the COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME joint guidelines on The Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing encourages journals to establish their own policy in “data sharing and reproducibility” (DS&R). However, this document neither provides detailed recommendations / templates nor explains the reproducibility crisis phenomenon.Objectives. To analyze and interpret the international guidelines, the best practices of global publishers and journals, as well as typical mistakes and experience of selected Russian journals, to help a journal develop its own DS&R policy and its implementation.Materials and methods. The analysis of various sources (literature, reporting guidelines, data repositories), policies of 83 Russian university journals, as well as policies of the top 5 international publishers and their journals. Interviews with 6 editors-in-chief of Russian journals regarding DS&R.Results. All the top 5 global publishers in their DS&R policy adapt the TOP Guidelines and offer their own data sharing statement templates. Discussion and interpretations. The author suggests Russian translation of the TOP Guidelines and the main templates (e.g., data sharing statement). He also discusses 9 best journal policies and practices (including pre-registration studies).Conclusions. Numerous international sources, as well as the experience of selected Russian journals, demonstrate that the implementation of the DS&R policy increases articles citation (averagely by 25.3%), the growth of journal’s bibliometric and altmetric indicators, and also contributes to the trust of the target audience. As a result, it strengthes the journal portfolio to enable publishing articles well ahead of schedule. However, only the declarative statement of DS&R policies by journals without proper implementation does not bring tangible benefits to the journals.
35
Mirihagalla, Padmaka, und Gyula Vastag. „Maturity models : Taking stock and moving forward“. Hungarian Statistical Review 5, Nr. 1 (2022): 3–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.35618/hsr2022.01.en003.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Maturity models (MMs) are based on the premise that improved maturity in organisational capabilities leads to improvements in the desired outcome measures. This promising potential explains the growing popularity of MMs and the large number of publications on the subject in various academic and professional journals. The present study is based on an analysis of 339 MM papers published in 193 journals between 1973 and 2017. After giving a brief overview of the theoretical underpinnings of MMs, the authors focus on answering the question of ‘where to publish to achieve maximum impact’ from the perspective of potential authors. The impact of a publication, measured by the number of citations collected over its lifetime, is influenced by the quality of the journal (measured by the journal’s article influence score by Clarivate Analytics, Scimago Journal Ranking by Scimago, and Scimago Q category) and the length of public availability of the publication. Results from a variety of partitioning models (decision tree, bootstrap forest, and boosted tree) show that publishing in high-quality, recognised journals tends to result in more citations. In other words, in a network of journals, not all citations are equal as citations in selective, highly ranked journals are more equal than others. It is also important to emphasise that Scimago’s Q classification has no bearing on a paper’s post-publication success; Q classification is a noisy and poor measure of a journal’s quality that is not used globally.
36
Al-Zoubi, Suhail. „Evaluating quality of Arab journals of special education“. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences 17, Nr. 1 (31.01.2022): 31–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i1.6679.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The quality of the research can be measured by a set of standards and indicators that focus on the idea of research originality, the depth of discussion, the literature analysis techniques, and the quality of research instruments. This research aims to evaluate the quality of Arab journals of special education (AJSEs). Five AJSEs were evaluated, all specializing in special education in the Arab world. The AJSEs were issued in Egypt, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and Yemen. A checklist of 20 indicators was developed and applied to these journals. Results revealed that 5 indicators were highly met, 11 indicators were moderately met, and 4 indicators were low met in AJSEs. The results also indicated a difference in the quality indicators achievability (QIA) according to the journal's name. The QIA in International Journal for Talent Development, and Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation was considerable. While, the QIA of the Saudi Journal of Special Education and Arab Journal of Disability and Talent Sciences was moderate, and it was low in Journal of Special Education.
Keywords: Arab journals of special education, indicators, quality, scientific publishing, special education
37
Runde, Brendan, und Craig Harms. „Vet the journal before you submit: turnaround times of journals publishing in zoological medicine and related fields“. PeerJ 11 (11.07.2023): e15656. http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15656.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Many factors influence selection of a target journal for publishing scientific papers, including “fit” within the journal’s scope, acceptance rate, readership, open access options, submission and publication costs, journal quality, and timeliness of publication. Timeliness of publication can be a critical factor affecting career development, but many journals are not transparent about turnaround times. Here we evaluated 49 journals publishing papers in zoological medicine and related fields between 2017 and 2022, and aggregated and examined distributions of turnaround time of journals that publicly provided the requisite data, in order to aid authors in selecting target journals that best meet their needs. Of 49 journals evaluated, 39 provided necessary dates for reconstructing turnaround times. Of these, median times to acceptance ranged from 37 to 338 days, and median times to publication ranged from 41 to 403.5 days. The percentage of papers published in greater than 1 year (“slow”) ranged from 0 to 57.1%, while the percentage of papers published in under 6 months (“timely”) ranged from 0.8 to 99.8%. Acceptance rates and times to first decision were available for only 22% and 20%, respectively, of journals evaluated. Results may prove useful for authors deciding where to submit their works, depending on how they prioritize the many factors involved.
38
Stone, Mathew Lee. „UK Library and Information Science Research is Having a Significant Influence on Research in Other Subject Disciplines“. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 9, Nr. 1 (05.03.2014): 56. http://dx.doi.org/10.18438/b81s5w.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Objective – To quantify the value of librarianship and information science (LIS) exports knowledge to other subject disciplines.
Design – Bibliometric study.
Setting – LIS departments in U.K. universities.
Subjects – 232 LIS research articles published between 2001 and 2007.
Methods – Data from the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise were checked to identify 405 research articles submitted by 10 selected university departments (out of a total of 21), which submitted research in the LIS category. The Web of Science database was then searched to see how many of these articles had been cited in other articles (n=232). If the citing article was published in a non-LIS journal it was considered a knowledge export. Journals were defined as non-LIS if they had not been assigned the subject category of Information Science & Library Science by the Journal of Citation Reports. The journal Impact Factors (IFs) of citing journals were then normalized to measure the value of individual knowledge exports to their respective subject disciplines. This was done by comparing a citing journal’s IF with the median journal IF within that subject category. If the citing journal’s IF was above this median it was considered to be a valuable knowledge export.
Main Results – The sample of LIS research articles produced a total of 1,061 knowledge exports in 444 unique non-LIS journals. These non-LIS journals covered 146 unique subject categories of which those related to computer science and chemistry/pharmacology cited LIS research with the greatest frequency. Just over three-quarters (n=798) of these citations were considered to be valuable knowledge exports. A sub-analysis showed that LIS articles published in non-LIS journals were significantly more valuable than the knowledge exports published in LIS journals.
Conclusion – The validity of bibliometric studies can be improved by adopting the two methodological innovations presented in this study. The first innovation is to avoid over-estimating the number of knowledge exports by discounting “part exports” (i.e., where the citing journal is assigned to multiple subject categories, one of which includes the same as that of the cited reference). The second innovation introduced by this study is to add an extra dimension to the analysis by measuring the value of each knowledge export by taking into account the “normalized” impact factor of citing journals.
39
Fatima, Nishat. „Citation Analysis of Business Research: An International Journal in the Field of Business“. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 37, Nr. 4 (30.06.2017): 281. http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.37.4.11126.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
<p>The present study is citation analysis of Business Research. It covers 18 issues of 9 volumes of Business Research published bi-annually during the period 2008-2016. The analysis covers the study of citation pattern and chronological growth citations. It also covers authorship pattern of the articles and various information sources of cited material. On the basis of citation analysis, a rank list of journals is prepared and core journals in the field of Business research are identified. Similarly, core areas of research are identified. The study reveals that researchers have cited journals (77.33%) more than books, editorial works and all other sources of information. Growth in collaborative trend of writing papers is also noticed as citations contributed by two authors is (37.67%) and single authors is (33.42%) followed by three authors (21.59%). Half-life of journal’s citations is found to be fourteen years. Bradford’s law doesn’t found fit in the study. Academy of Management Journal (157 citations), Strategic Management Journal (141 citations) and The Journal of Finance (136 citations) are the most cited journals. Supply chain management and advertising are the two main areas of research among researchers.</p>
40
Hayman, Richard. „Editors View the Continuous Publication Model as a Satisfactory Alternative for Open Access LIS Journals“. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 9, Nr. 3 (09.09.2014): 83. http://dx.doi.org/10.18438/b8v89p.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
A Review of:
Cirasella, J., & Bowdoin, S. (2013). Just roll with it? Rolling volumes vs. discrete issues in open access library and information science journals. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 1(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1086
Abstract
Objective – To understand the prevalence of, motivations for, and satisfaction with using a rolling-volume publishing model, as opposed to publishing discrete issues, across open access academic journals in library and information science.
Design – A 12 question survey questionnaire.
Setting – English-language, open access library and information science (LIS) journals published in the United States of America.
Subjects – A total of 21 open access LIS journals identified via the Directory of Open Access Journals that were actively publishing, and that also met the authors’ standard of scholarliness, which they established by identifying a journal’s peer-review process or other evidence of rigorous review. Based on responses, 12 journals published using discrete issues, while 9 published as rolling volumes or as rolling volumes with some discrete issues.
Methods – In late 2011, the study’s authors invited lead editors or primary journal contacts to complete the survey. Survey participants were asked to identify whether their journal published in discrete issues, rolling volumes, or rolling volumes with occasional discrete issues, with the latter two categories combined as one for ease of results analysis. Survey logic split respondents into two groups, either discrete-issue or rolling-volume. Respondents in both categories were posed similar sets of questions, with the key difference being that the questions directed at each category accounted for the publication model the journals themselves identified as using. Editors from both groups were asked about the reasons for using the publication model they identified for their journal: within the survey tool, authors provided 16 potential reasons for using a discrete-issue model, and 13 potential reasons for using a rolling-volume model. Respondents from both groups were asked to mark all reasons that applied for their respective journals. The survey also included questions about whether the journal had ever used the alternate publishing model, the editor’s satisfaction with their current model, and the likelihood of the journal switching to the alternate publishing model in the foreseeable future.
Main Results – The authors collected complete responses from 21 of the original 29 journals invited to participate in the study, a response rate of 72%. For the 12 journals that identified as using discrete issues, ease of production workflow (91.7%), clear production deadlines (75.0%), and journal publicity and promotion (75.0%) were the three most common reasons for using a discrete-issue model. For the nine journals using rolling volumes, improved production workflow (77.8%), decreased dependence on production deadlines (77.8%), and increased speed of research dissemination (66.7%) were the three most common reasons cited for using a rolling-volume model.
Findings show that overall satisfaction with a journal’s particular publication model was a common factor regardless of publishing model in use, though only the rolling-volume editors unanimously reported being very satisfied with their model. This high satisfaction rate is reflected in editors’ positions that they were very unlikely to switch away from the rolling-volume method. While a majority of editors of discrete-issue journals also reported being very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their current model, the mixed responses to whether they would contemplate switching to the alternate model suggests that awareness of the benefits of rolling-volume publishing is increasing.
Conclusion – Researchers discovered a greater incidence of rolling-volume model journals with open access LIS journals than anticipated, suggesting that this is an area where additional research is necessary. The relative newness of the rolling-volume model may be a contributing factor to the high satisfaction rate among editors of journals using this model, as journal editors are likely to be more deliberate in selecting this model over the traditional discrete-issue publishing model. Workflow and production practices were identified as key characteristics for selecting a publishing model regardless of the model selected, and therefore this is another area in need of further investigation.
41
Dorta-González, Pablo. „A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis to Measure the Journal Contribution to the Social Attention of Research“. Axioms 12, Nr. 4 (30.03.2023): 337. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/axioms12040337.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper proposes a three-year average of social attention as a more reliable measure of the social impact of journals since the social attention of research can vary widely among scientific articles, even within the same journal. The proposed measure is used to evaluate a journal’s contribution to social attention in comparison to other bibliometric indicators. This study uses Dimensions as a data source and examines research articles from 76 disciplinary libraries and information science journals through multiple linear regression analysis. This study identifies socially influential journals whose contribution to social attention is twice that of scholarly impact, as measured by citations. In addition, this study finds that the number of authors and open access have a moderate effect on social attention, while the journal impact factor has a negative effect and funding has a small effect.
42
Chua, SK, Ahmad M. Qureshi, Vijay Krishnan, Dinker R. Pai, Laila B. Kamal, Sharmilla Gunasegaran, MZ Afzal et al. „The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article’s citations“. F1000Research 6 (02.03.2017): 208. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10892.1.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background Citations of papers are positively influenced by the journal’s impact factor (IF). For non-open access (non-OA) journals, this influence may be due to the fact that high-IF journals are more often purchased by libraries, and are therefore more often available to researchers, than low-IF journals. This positive influence has not, however, been shown specifically for papers published in open access (OA) journals, which are universally accessible, and do not need library purchase. It is therefore important to ascertain if the IF influences citations in OA journals too. Methods 203 randomized controlled trials (102 OA and 101 non-OA) published in January 2011 were included in the study. Five-year citations for papers published in OA journals were compared to those for non-OA journals. Source papers were derived from PubMed. Citations were retrieved from Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. The Thompson-Reuter’s IF was used. Results OA journals were found to have significantly more citations overall compared to non-OA journals (median 15.5 vs 12, p=0.039). The IF did not correlate with citations for OA journals (Spearman’s rho =0.187, p=0.60). The increase in the citations with increasing IF was minimal for OA journals (beta coefficient = 3.346, 95% CI -0.464, 7.156, p=0.084). In contrast, the IF did show moderate correlation with citations for articles published in non-OA journals (Spearman’s rho=0.514, p<0.001). The increase in the number of citations was also significant (beta coefficient = 4.347, 95% CI 2.42, 6.274, p<0.001). Conclusion It is better to publish in an OA journal for more citations. It may not be worth paying high publishing fees for higher IF journals, because there is minimal gain in terms of increased number of citations. On the other hand, if one wishes to publish in a non-OA journal, it is better to choose one with a high IF.
43
Dilevko, Juris, und Esther Atkinson. „Evaluating Academic Journals without Impact Factors for Collection Management Decisions“. College & Research Libraries 63, Nr. 6 (01.11.2002): 562–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl.63.6.562.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Evaluation of academic journals for collection management decisions is made all the more difficult when some journals do not have impact factors as assigned by the Institute for Scientific Information and its Journal Citation Reports. Focusing on science, technology, and medicine journals, this study presents a method of evaluating such nonranked journals. The method is based on finding a comparator journal to the nonranked journal, distinguishing between original research articles and other article types, tracing citations to these two target journals in citing journals, comparing the quality of the citing journals that cite both target journals, and describing the contextual typology of the citations to the target journals. A case study of two medical science journals, the nonranked Annals of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and the comparator ranked Canadian Family Physician, illustrates the method. This method can help in determining the value of a nonranked journal in relation to a ranked journal.
44
Estes, W. K. „Journals, Journals, Journals“. Psychological Science 1, Nr. 1 (Januar 1990): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1990.tb00056.x.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
45
Cernicova-Buca, Mariana. „Language Preferences in Romanian Communication Sciences Journals: A Web-Based Analysis“. Publications 9, Nr. 1 (11.03.2021): 11. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/publications9010011.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In modern times, English has become the lingua franca of science, dominating journal publishing ecologies. Multilingual journals keep up the flag, many researchers arguing that, especially in the case of social sciences and humanities, diversity of languages is an asset. In Romania, in the absence of national databases or repositories, the first task to understand linguistic preferences for scientific communication is to map the ground. The study extracted information on Romanian communication sciences journals from four major databases. Out of the 22 identified journals, only eight are dedicated solely to communication sciences, grouped in two poles of communication sciences schools, where doctoral studies in the field have been established. While English dominates the publication world, multilinguistic journals also appear, prevailing in traditional multicultural regions such as Transylvania–Banat. The future of multilingual journals depends on, among other factors, the capacity of the European Union to promote linguistic diversity for scientific purposes. Meanwhile, Romanian journals in communication sciences work towards increasing their impact. Research findings have practical and policy implications, the core idea being that Romanian editors need to strive for better standards in publication and showcase the journals better on the journal’s webpage.
46
Feeley, Thomas, Seyoung Lee und Shin-Il Moon. „A Journal-Level Analysis of Progress in Transplantation“. Progress in Transplantation 28, Nr. 1 (11.12.2017): 19–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1526924817746914.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Context: Citations to articles published in academic journals represent a proxy for influence in bibliometrics. Objective: To measure the journal impact factor for Progress in Transplantation over time and to also identify related journals indexed in transplantation and surgery. Design: Data from Journal Citation Reports (ISI web of science) were used to rank Progress in Transplantation compared to peer journals using journal impact and journal relatedness measures. Social network analysis was used to measure relationships between pairs of journals in Progress in Transplantation’s relatedness network. Main Outcome Measures: Journal impact factor and journal relatedness. Results: Data from 2010 through 2015 indicate the average journal article in PIT was cited 0.87 times (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12) and this estimate was stable over time. Progress in Transplantation most often cited American Journal of Transplantation, Transplantation, American Journal of Kidney Diseases, and Liver Transplantation. In terms of cited data, the journal was most often referenced by Clinical Transplantation, Transplant International, and Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. Conclusion: The journal is listed both in surgery and transplantation categories of Journal Citation Reports and its impact factors over time fare better with surgery journals than with transplant journals. Network data using betweenness centrality indicate Progress in Transplantation links transplantation-focused journals and journals indexed in health sciences categories.
47
Ginieis, Matías, und Xiaoni Li. „Ranking of Sustainability Journals Using the Author Affiliation Index and Comparison to Other Journal Metrics“. Sustainability 12, Nr. 3 (04.02.2020): 1104. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12031104.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
An important component in evaluating research productivity is the quality of the academic journal. For this reason, the objective of this paper is to analyze the Author Affiliation Index (AAI) in sustainability field journals as a preliminary study to offer some insights into quality rating of journals in this chosen discipline. The AAI of a journal is defined as the percentage of the journal’s articles published by authors affiliated with a base set of high-quality academic universities or institutions. We conducted an evaluation of the top 50 journals in environmental studies indexed in the category Social Science in the Web of Science (WOS) database in 2018 and the top-notch 50 universities worldwide with master or postgraduate programs in the disciplines of management and sustainability studies. The results obtained demonstrate that there is a low AAI score on average in the sustainability field compared with other disciplines and the potential reason for such low scoring is probably caused by the high number of co-authors collaborating in environmental studies related journals. Although there is no agreement reached in terms of journal ratings by AAIs and other citation and survey-based measures, we can confirm certain elite affiliations effect which leading sustainability journals have higher concentrations of authors who are affiliated with elite institutions, however, such elite affiliation effect is on average much lower compared with other disciplines as finance, accounting or transportation, etc.
48
Krueger, Thomas, und Jack Shorter. „Bibliographic measures of top-tier finance and information systems journals“. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 12, Nr. 5 (19.11.2019): 841–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-12-2018-0257.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose Pay, tenure and promotion decisions are frequently based upon inferences regarding the value of faculty research. Meanwhile, departmental, college and university reputations are frequently based on perceptions regarding the quality of research being produced by its faculty. Making correct inferences requires accurate measurement of research quality, which is often based upon the journal through which results are shared. This research expands upon the research found elsewhere through its detailed investigation of leading journals in two business disciplines, including examination of four different citation-based measures and four journal characteristics which are exogenous to the quality of any individual piece of research. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach This study assists in the development of an accurate perspective regarding research quality, by studying the popular Journal Citation Reports (JCR) impact factor. A further expansion on the past literature is consideration of three newer journal quality metrics: SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) and percentage of articles cited. Top-tier journals in finance and information systems are compared to evaluate the consistency of these measures across disciplines. Differences in journal characteristics and their impact on citation-rate based measures of quality are also examined. The potential impact of discipline-based variation in acceptance rate, issue frequency, the time since journal inception and total reviewers are put forth as additional potential exogenous factors that may impact the perception of journal quality. t-Tests are employed for discipline comparisons, while correlation and multiple regression are used for journal characteristic analysis. Findings There is a significant difference in the JCR impact measures of high-quality finance journals vs high-quality information systems journals, which are correlated with a variety of journal-specific factors including the journal’s acceptance rate and frequency of issue. Information systems journals domination of finance journals persists whether one considers mean, median, minimum or maximum impact factors. SJR measures for finance journals are consistently higher than information systems journals, though the SJR value of any individual journal can be quite volatile. By comparison, the SNIP metric rates premier information systems journals higher. Over 12 percent more of the articles in leading information systems journals are cited during the initial three years. Research limitations/implications Logical extensions of this research include examining journals in other business disciplines. One could also evaluate quality measures reaction to variation in journal characteristics (i.e. changes in acceptance rates). Furthermore, one could include other measures of journal quality, including the recently released CiteScore metric. Such research will build on the present research and improve the accuracy of research quality assessment. Practical implications To the extent that citation-based research measures and journal-specific factors vary across disciplines as demonstrated by our investigation, discipline-specific traits should be considered adjusted for, when making inferences about the long-term value of recently published research. For instance, finance faculty publishing in journals with JCR readings of 2.0 are in journals that are 53 percent above the discipline’s average, while information systems faculty publishing in journals with JCR readings of 2.0 are in journals that are 18 percent below the discipline’s average. Furthermore, discipline-specific differences in journal characteristics, leading to differences in citation-based quality measures, should be considered when making inferences about the long-term value of recently published research in the process of making recommendations regarding salary adjustments, retention and promotion. Social implications Quantity and quality of research are two hallmarks of leading research institutions. Assessing research quality is very problematic because its definition has changed from being based on review process (i.e. blind refereed), to acceptance rates, to impact factors. Furthermore, the impact factor construct has been a lightning rod of controversy as researchers, administrators and journals themselves argue over which metric to employ. This research is attempting to assess how impact factors and journal characteristics may influence the impact factors, and how these interactions vary business discipline. The research is especially important and relevant to the authors which separately chair departments including finance and information systems faculty, and therefore are in roles requiring assessment of faculty research productivity including quality. Originality/value This study is a detailed analysis of bibliographic aspects of the top-tier journals in two quantitative business areas. In addition to the popular JCR, SJR and SNIP measures of performance, the analysis studies the seldom-examined percentage of the article cited metric. A deeper understanding of citation-based measures is obtained though the evaluation of changes in how journals have been rated on these metrics over time. The research shows that there are discipline-related systematic differences in both citation-based research measures and journal-specific factors and that these discipline-specific traits should be considered when making inferences about the long-term value of recently published research. Furthermore, discipline-specific difference in journal characteristics, leading to differences in citation-based quality measures, should be considered when making personnel and remuneration decisions.
49
Wang, Peiling, Dietmar Wolfram und Emrie Gilbert. „Endorsements of five reporting guidelines for biomedical research by journals of prominent publishers“. PLOS ONE 19, Nr. 2 (29.02.2024): e0299806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299806.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Biomedical research reporting guidelines provide a framework by which journal editors and the researchers who conduct studies can ensure that the reported research is both complete and transparent. With more than 16 different guidelines for the 11 major study types of medical and health research, authors need to be familiar with journal reporting standards. To assess the current endorsements of reporting guidelines for biomedical and health research, this study examined the instructions for authors (IFAs) of 559 biomedical journals by 11 prominent publishers that publish original research or systematic reviews/meta-analyses. Data from the above original sources were cleaned and restructured, and analyzed in a database and text miner. Each journal’s instructions or information for authors were examined to code if any of five prominent reporting guidelines were mentioned and what form the guideline adherence demonstration took. Seventeen journals published the reporting guidelines. Four of the five reporting guidelines listed journals as endorsers. For journals with open peer review reports, a sample of journals and peer reviews was analyzed for mention of adherence to reporting guidelines. The endorsement of research guidelines by publishers and their associated journals is inconsistent for some publishers, with only a small number of journals endorsing relevant guidelines. Based on the analysis of open peer reviews, there is evidence that some reviewers check the adherence to the endorsed reporting guidelines. Currently, there is no universal endorsement of reporting guidelines by publishers nor ways of demonstrating adherence to guidelines. Journals may not directly inform authors of their guideline endorsements, making it more difficult for authors to adhere to endorsed guidelines. Suggestions derived from the findings are provided for authors, journals, and reporting guidelines to ensure increased adequate use of endorsed reporting guidelines.
50
Wayant, Cole, Gretchan Moore, Mark Hoelscher, Courtney Cook und Matt Vassar. „Adherence to reporting guidelines and clinical trial registration policies in oncology journals: a cross-sectional review“. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 23, Nr. 3 (13.04.2018): 104–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2017-110855.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Reporting guidelines (RG) aim to improve research transparency and ensure high-quality study reporting. Similarly, clinical trial registration policies aim to reduce bias in results reporting by ensuring prospective registration of all trial outcomes. Failure to adhere to quality standards documented in RGs may result in low-quality and irreproducible research. Herein, we investigate the adherence to common RGs and trial registration policies in 21 oncology journals. We surveyed the Instructions for Authors page for each of the included oncology journals for adherence to common reporting guidelines and trial registration policies. We corresponded with editors to determine accepted study types and cross-referenced this information with a journal’s RGs and trial registration policies to calculate the per cent of journals that adhere to a specific guideline or policy. 76.2% (16/21) of oncology journals surveyed adhere to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines for clinical trials while only 33.3% (7/21) adhere to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for observational studies. Similarly, 76.2% (16/21) of oncology journals adhere to clinical trial registration policies. We further demonstrate that journal adherence to RGs positively affects author reporting, despite adherence to trial registration policies showing no such benefit. Our results show that oncology journals adhere to RGs and trial registration policies at a higher rate than other specialties, but nonetheless show room for improvement. We conclude that oncology journal adherence to RGs and trial registration policies is encouraging, but nonetheless suboptimal. We recommend the adoption of RGs and trial registration policies by all oncology journals.