scholarly journals Trade-off between urgency and reduced editorial capacity affect publication speed in ecological and medical journals during 2020

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Rodriguez Forti ◽  
Luiz A. Solino ◽  
Judit K. Szabo
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Time Lag ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Medical Journals ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Publication Time ◽  
Female Scientists

AbstractWhile the speed of publication in academic journals has decreased over time, delays in the review process can still cause frustration and damage the authors’ career. During the COVID-19 lockdown, scientists struggled to manage tasks and academic journals announced possible publication delays due to reduced editorial capacity. In this context, COVID-19 research has been somewhat paradoxical, due to societal and editorial pressures for fast publication. We hypothesised that given the urgency of disseminating pandemic-related information, articles on the topic would be published as a priority in 2020. We analysed the submission-to-publication time lag for 5790 articles published between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 in eight ecology and eight medical journals. We also analysed patterns in the gender of first and last authors. All 16 journals were international, with relatively high impact factor (between 2.34 and 36.13) and partially or fully open access. Even though articles in general took longer to get published, the speed of publication increased in 2020, as the faster review of 419 COVID-19 articles compensated for the longer submission-to-publication time lag of non-COVID-19 publications. Manuscripts in journals with a higher impact factor and only partial open access took longer to get published during the last three years. In 2020, the ratio of articles with male and female first and last authors remained similar to that in 2019, maintaining the gender bias in scientific productivity. Female scientists, especially when they are providing maternity and other primary care, need more support for their careers, such as relief from teaching duties and adjustments on assessment criteria to access research funding. We advocate that topics besides COVID-19, particularly those that could help to solve other urgent crises, should also benefit from faster publication.

scholarly journals 2020 - State of our JCMR

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren J. Manning
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Review Process ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Timely Manner ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Access System ◽  
Responsible Manner

AbstractThere were 79 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2019, including 65 original research papers, 2 reviews, 8 technical notes, 1 Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonacne (SCMR) guideline, and 3 corrections. The volume was down slightly from 2018 (n = 89) with a corresponding 5.5% increase in manuscript submissions from 345 to 366. This led to a slight decrease in the acceptance rate from 25 to 22%. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2019 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2020) increased from 5.07 to 5.36. The 2020 impact factor means that on average, each JCMR published in 2017 and 2018 was cited 5.36 times in 2019. Our 5 year impact factor was 5.2. We are now finishing the 13th year of JCMR as an open-access publication with BMC. As outlined in this report, the Open-Access system has dramatically increased the reading and citation of JCMR publications. I hope that our authors will continue to send their very best, high quality manuscripts for JCMR consideration and that our readers will continue to look to JCMR for the very best/state-of-the-art publications in our field. It takes a village to run a journal. JCMR is blessed to have very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and Reviewers. I thank each of them for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner. These efforts have allowed the JCMR to continue as the premier journal of our field. My role, and the entire process would not be possible without the dedication and efforts of our managing editor, Diana Gethers (who will leaving the journal in the coming months) and our assistant managing editor, Jennifer Rodriguez, who has agreed to increase her reponsibilities. Finally, I thank you for entrusting me with the editorship of the JCMR. As I begin my 5th year as your editor-in-chief, please know that I fully recognize we are not perfect in our review process. We try our best to objectively assess every submission in a timely manner, but sometimes don't get it “right.” The editorial process is a tremendously fulfilling experience for me. The opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and a highlight of my week!

scholarly journals Prospects of open access to Indian agricultural research: A case study of ICAR

First Monday ◽  
2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aneeja Guttikonda ◽  
Sridhar Gutam
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Time Lag ◽  
Professional Societies ◽  
Research Journal ◽  
Open Access Journals

Historically, agricultural research and education in India have been in the public domain. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) was established as an apex organization for effective research coordination among institutions and promotion of agricultural research in the country. Funds for agricultural research institutes were channeled through the ICAR from the central government. For the dissemination of research output, the research journals publishing in India have been, for long, primarily a public funded activity and done mostly by Government agencies. In case of agricultural research, the journals are being published by ICAR and by respective professional societies. Many of these societies are receiving financial assistance partly from ICAR. Each discipline of agriculture is represented by some sort of professional society and for some disciplines, and each society publishes a peer–reviewed research journal. Though many of these journals are distributed for international indexing, full–text database services are very poor. Many of them are not even in the ISI Master Journal list for impact factor or science citation index analysis. The main objective of each author is to have more impact, visibility and readership for their work. These journals publish quality articles after stringent peer review process, but the time lag from submission to publication of an article or production of issue is long. There are instances where the articles sent for review were not returned back due to various reasons. The infrastructure for publishing online is also not available for these journals. Recently, a portal (http://www.indianjournals.com) had started providing online access to some of the journals which are being published by professional societies. Under the National Agriculture Innovation Project (NAIP), ICAR is making available some subscription–based foreign international online journals along with other open access journals. Now the time has come to think about the wider availability of scientific journals without any restrictions. The availability of open source software for the transformation of traditional journals into open access journals and the establishment of open archive online repositories for archiving research will eventually make agricultural research reach to much larger audiences. This will increase the visibility of research output and eventually lead to an enhanced impact factor for many Indian agricultural research journals.

Increasing author counts in neurosurgical journals from 1980 to 2020

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Tyler S. Cole ◽  
Mark A. Pacult ◽  
Michael T. Lawton
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Publication Type ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Publication Volume ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Number Of Authors

OBJECTIVE Scientific productivity, as assessed by publication volume, is a common metric by which the academic neurosurgical field assesses its members. The number of authors per peer-reviewed article has been observed to increase over time across a broad range of medical specialties. This study provides an update to this trend in the neurosurgical literature. METHODS All publications from January 1, 1980, to April 30, 2020, were queried from four neurosurgical journals: Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS), JNS: Pediatrics, and JNS: Spine. Publication information was acquired from the National Center for Biotechnology Information Entrez database and reconciled with the Scopus database. Publication type was limited to articles and excluded editorials, letters, and reviews. The number of authors and affiliation counts were determined based on structured abstract fields provided in the two databases. RESULTS Between January 1, 1980, and April 30, 2020, the overall increase in author count for the four neurosurgical journals was 0.12 to 0.18 authors per year (p < 0.001). For Neurosurgery, the mean (SD) author count increased from 2.81 (1.4) in 1980–1985 to 7.97 (4.92) in 2016–2020 (p < 0.001). For the JNS, the mean (SD) author count increased from 2.82 (1.04) in 1980–1985 to 7.6 (3.65) in 2016–2020 (p < 0.001). The percentage of articles with more than 10 authors increased from 0.2% to 22.3% in Neurosurgery and from 1.9% to 17.5% in JNS. Only 28% of the author count variation was explained by an increasing number of institutional or departmental affiliations. CONCLUSIONS Author counts for peer-reviewed articles in neurosurgical academic journals have increased significantly during the past 4 decades, with large increases in the numbers of articles with more than 10 authors in the past 5 years. A total of 28% of the variation in this increase can be explained by an increase in multiinstitutional or multidepartmental studies.

scholarly journals Subject category oncology in journal citation reports 2000-2006: Analysis of impact factor distribution and publishing data

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 85-87
Author(s):  
Stela Filipi-Matutinovic ◽  
Aleksandra Popovic ◽  
Sanja Antonic
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
English Language ◽  
Scientific Communication ◽  
Subject Group ◽  
Adequate Measure ◽  
Subject Category ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Subject

Impact factor (IF) of journals is assumed an adequate measure of its importance in the scientific communication of a defined subject. It is important to have in mind that IF is varying very much in time. The range of IF for journals classified in the subject group ONCOLOGY is analyzed for the period 2000-2006. There are only seven of 127 journals in year 2006 which have IF higher than 10. The highest impact in the analyzed period has the journal CA-CANCERJ CLIN, varying from 24,674 to 63,342, but the important fact about that journal is that it publishes very small number of articles annually. The number of journals on the list also changed from 103 in 2000 to 127 in year 2006. Only one journal from the list is published in German and five are multilingual, all the rest are published in English language. Besides US (66), Great Britain (29), Holland (7), and Switzerland (6), all other 11 countries have few journals, mostly situated in the last part of the list ranked by IF. When choosing where to publish their results, scientists should consider all available facts about a journal - from its IF and the way it changes with time, to its openness, availability in libraries and on the WWW, possibility to keep author rights and put the article in an open access repository, where it will get more attention from authors that do not have access to that journal, etc.

scholarly journals Problems faced by Researchers and pressure on Impact Factor Journal Editors

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaukat Ali Jawaid
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Original Work ◽  
Impact Factor Journal ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Open Access Article

doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.3.4296 How to cite this:Jawaid SA. Problems faced by Researchers and pressure on Impact Factor Journal Editors. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(3):616-620.  doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.3.4296 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

scholarly journals Reforming Science Publishing

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Moustafa
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Publishing Industry ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
The Past ◽  
Open Access Journals

Over the past few years, different changes have been introduced into the science publishing industry. However, important reforms are still required at both the content and form levels. First, the peer review process needs to be open, fair and transparent. Second, author-paid fees in open access journals need to either be removed or reconsidered toward more affordability. Third, the categorization of papers should include all types of scientific contributions that can be of higher interest to the scientific community than many mere quantitative and observable measures, or simply removed from publications. Forth, word counts and reference numbers in online open access journal should be nuanced or replaced by recommended ranges rather than to be a proxy of acceptance or rejection. Finally, all the coauthors of a manuscript should be considered corresponding authors and responsible for their mutual manuscript rather than only one or two.

The quality of internet information on psychosis treatment for Australian people (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Wilhelm ◽  
Tonelle Handley ◽  
Catherine McHugh McHugh ◽  
David Lowenstein ◽  
Kristy Arrold
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Substantial Improvement ◽  
Website Quality ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Internet Information ◽  
Editorial Review ◽  
Assess Quality ◽  
Available Information ◽  
Over Time

BACKGROUND The internet is increasingly seen as an important source of health information for consumers and their families. Accessing information related to their illness and treatment enables consumers to more confidently discuss their health and treatments with their doctors, but the abundance of readily available information also means can be confusing in terms of how reliable the information to enable consumers, families and clinicians to participate in the decision-making process of their care. OBJECTIVE The current study aimed to rate the quality of websites with psychosis-related information (using a validated instrument (DISCERN) and purpose-developed Psychosis Website Quality Checklist (PWQC) to assess quality over time and aid professionals in directing consumers to the best available information. METHODS Entering search terms ‘psychotic’, ‘psychosis’, ‘schizophrenia’, ‘delusion’, ‘hallucination’ into the search engine Google (www.google.com.au) provided 25 websites evaluated by DISCERN and PWQC at two time points, January-March 2014, and January-March 2018, by three diverse health professionals. RESULTS Only the six highest ranked achieved DISCERN scores indicating “good” quality. The overall mean scores of websites were 43.96 (SD=12.08) indicating “fair” quality. PWQC ratings were high on “availability and usability” but poor on “credibility,” “currency,” and “breadth and accuracy”, with no substantial improvement quality over time. Having an editorial/ review process (56% of websites) was significantly associated with higher quality scores on both scales. CONCLUSIONS The quality of available information was ‘fair’ and had not significantly improved over time. While higher-quality websites exist, there is no easy way to assess this on face value. Having a readily identifiable editorial/review process was one indicator of website quality. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable

scholarly journals Hearts—An Open Access Journal of Cardiology

Hearts ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Shu-Kun Lin
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Neonatal Screening ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Medical Journals

MDPI has been publishing several medical journals, including: International Journal of Neonatal Screening [...]

Evolving landscape of scholarly journals in open access environment

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (6/7) ◽  
pp. 550-567
Author(s):  
Sumeer Gul ◽  
Sangita Gupta ◽  
Tariq Ahmad Shah ◽  
Nahida Tun Nisa ◽  
Shazia Manzoor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Time Lag ◽  
High Income ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Finnish Meteorological Institute ◽  
Open Access Journals

Purpose Open access journals (OAJs) offer immediate, free and unrestricted online access to the scholarly literature. The purpose of this study is to trace the status and characteristics of OAJs published across the globe. Various trends that have evolved in OAJ market have been studied. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on data collected from one of the largest OA journal directory – Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The data were downloaded on 02 January 2018 and details of OAJs added to DOAJ till 31 December 2018 were harvested, codified and further analyzed in SPSS software. A Microsoft-Excel template application – MAKESENS – developed by Finnish Meteorological Institute (Finland) in 2002, was explored to perform Mann–Kendall Test and Sen’s Slope Estimates. Findings A less score of OAJs offer access to their archival content. An increasing trend is witnessed in the OAJ publishing with Elsevier, Sciendo and BioMed Central (BMC) as the top publishers. Majority of publishers are from high-income zone countries, followed by upper-middle and lower-middle zone countries. Majority of OA publishers are from the UK, Indonesia and Brazil. A lesser score of journals offer article processing charges and/or author submission charges. Majority of OAJs from high- and lower-middle-income zone countries levy submission/processing charge to authors compared to OA journals from upper-middle- and lower-income zone countries (p < 0.01). OJS stays a prioritized platform for hosting OA journal content. Portico and CLOCKSS/LOCKSS are mostly used for long-term preservation purposes. Majority of OAJs from high-income zone countries participate in digital arching initiatives compared to ones from other income zones. Majority of the journals adopt a peer review (double-blind peer review, blind peer review, peer review and open peer review) process for validation of their scholarly content. The time lag between submission and publication ranges from one to 53 weeks, with majority of OAJs having a time lag of 11-20 weeks. Creative Commons Licenses are mainly adopted by OAJs. Research limitations/implications As the study is based on the data offered by DOAJ, any gaps in the DOAJ data will also get reflected in the study. Further, there might be other OAJs also that have yet to show compliance with DOAJ standards and get indexed with it. Originality/value The study tries to showcase the current status and characteristics of OAJs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document