scholarly journals The Emergency Medicine Facing the Challenge of Open Science

Data ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Sixto-Costoya ◽  
Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent ◽  
Rut Lucas-Domínguez ◽  
Antonio Vidal-Infer
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Text Documents ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Central Repository ◽  
Supplementary Material ◽  
Meet Data ◽  
Journal Citation

(1) Background: The availability of research datasets can strengthen and facilitate research processes. This is specifically relevant in the emergency medicine field due to the importance of providing immediate care in critical situations as the very current Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic is showing to the scientific community. This work aims to show which Emergency Medicine journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) currently meet data sharing criteria. (2) Methods: This study analyzes the editorial policies regarding the data deposit of the journals in the emergency medicine category of the JCR and evaluates the Supplementary material of the articles published in these journals that have been deposited in the PubMed Central repository. (3) Results: It has been observed that 19 out of the 24 journals contained in the emergency medicine category of Journal Citation Reports are also located in PubMed Central (PMC), yielding a total of 5983 articles. Out of these, only 9.4% of the articles contain supplemental material. Although second quartile journals of JCR emergency medicine category have quantitatively more articles in PMC, the main journals involved in the deposit of supplemental material belong to the first quartile, of which the most used format in the articles is pdf, followed by text documents. (4) Conclusion: This study reveals that data sharing remains an incipient practice in the emergency medicine field, as there are still barriers between researchers to participate in data sharing. Therefore, it is necessary to promote dynamics to improve this practice both qualitatively (the quality and format of datasets) and quantitatively (the quantity of datasets in absolute terms) in research.

scholarly journals Data sharing policies of journals in life, health, and physical sciences indexed in Journal Citation Reports

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e9924
Author(s):  
Jihyun Kim ◽  
Soon Kim ◽  
Hye-Min Cho ◽  
Jae Hwa Chang ◽  
Soo Young Kim
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Life Science ◽  
Subject Area ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Physical Sciences ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Journal Citation

Background Many scholarly journals have established their own data-related policies, which specify their enforcement of data sharing, the types of data to be submitted, and their procedures for making data available. However, except for the journal impact factor and the subject area, the factors associated with the overall strength of the data sharing policies of scholarly journals remain unknown. This study examines how factors, including impact factor, subject area, type of journal publisher, and geographical location of the publisher are related to the strength of the data sharing policy. Methods From each of the 178 categories of the Web of Science’s 2017 edition of Journal Citation Reports, the top journals in each quartile (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) were selected in December 2018. Of the resulting 709 journals (5%), 700 in the fields of life, health, and physical sciences were selected for analysis. Four of the authors independently reviewed the results of the journal website searches, categorized the journals’ data sharing policies, and extracted the characteristics of individual journals. Univariable multinomial logistic regression analyses were initially conducted to determine whether there was a relationship between each factor and the strength of the data sharing policy. Based on the univariable analyses, a multivariable model was performed to further investigate the factors related to the presence and/or strength of the policy. Results Of the 700 journals, 308 (44.0%) had no data sharing policy, 125 (17.9%) had a weak policy, and 267 (38.1%) had a strong policy (expecting or mandating data sharing). The impact factor quartile was positively associated with the strength of the data sharing policies. Physical science journals were less likely to have a strong policy relative to a weak policy than Life science journals (relative risk ratio [RRR], 0.36; 95% CI [0.17–0.78]). Life science journals had a greater probability of having a weak policy relative to no policy than health science journals (RRR, 2.73; 95% CI [1.05–7.14]). Commercial publishers were more likely to have a weak policy relative to no policy than non-commercial publishers (RRR, 7.87; 95% CI, [3.98–15.57]). Journals by publishers in Europe, including the majority of those located in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, were more likely to have a strong data sharing policy than a weak policy (RRR, 2.99; 95% CI [1.85–4.81]). Conclusions These findings may account for the increase in commercial publishers’ engagement in data sharing and indicate that European national initiatives that encourage and mandate data sharing may influence the presence of a strong policy in the associated journals. Future research needs to explore the factors associated with varied degrees in the strength of a data sharing policy as well as more diverse characteristics of journals related to the policy strength.

scholarly journals Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ye Jin Choi ◽  
Hyung Wook Choi ◽  
Soon Kim
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Profit Model ◽  
Academic Society ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Information Category ◽  
Journal Citation

Purpose: The “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” are of increasing importance in an open science environment as a way to increase the transparency and quality of academic society journals. However, little previous research has investigated the application of this new guideline in practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree to which this guideline is being applied by Korean academic society– published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports.Methods: The researchers investigated the homepages of 59 Korean academic society– published journals to evaluate whether they had adopted the 33 items listed in the guideline. Based on the information available on the journals’ homepages, each item was classified as ‘yes’ or ‘no’ within the four categories of basic journal information, publication ethics, copyright and archiving information, and profit model.Results: The basic journal information category was generally well-practiced, with the exceptions of the peer review process, readership, and author fees. The copyright and licensing information category was also well-practiced, with the exception of policies on posting accepted articles with third parties and archiving items. However, most items in the publication ethics category were not well practiced, with the exception of authorship and intellectual property. All items in the profit model category were infrequently implemented.Conclusion: These findings serve as a good indicator for Korean journal editors of areas for improvement. It may be helpful to review journals’ publication policies and homepages to comply with international publishing standards.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document