scholarly journals The Difficult Way to Publish a Research Paper

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (A) ◽  
pp. 483-487
Author(s):  
Kuat Oshakbayev ◽  
Gulnara Bedelbayeva ◽  
Khalit Mustafin ◽  
Attila Tordai

BACKGROUND: The authors aim to publish the results of their studies in peer-reviewed targeted international journals with a high impact-factor as possible, but they are also exposing to “predatory” publishers. AIM: The aim of the study was to offer some advices for authors to help to identify relevant medical journals, avoid “predatory” journals and publishers, use intermediary services, know a journal policy, and expectations of good journal editor(s). RECOMMENDATIONS: During the publication process authors should find suitable journals, assume a risk to encounter “predatory” or “hijacked” journals, know the advantages and disadvantages of using intermediary publishing services, understand expectations of editor(s), and make payment for article processing. CONCLUSIONS: The advices can help many researchers to publish their papers in relevant journals with cited indexes, and avoid many problems within the publication process.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kuat Oshakbayev ◽  
Gulnara Bedelbayeva ◽  
Khalit Mustafin ◽  
Attila Tordai

<p><b>Background</b> Authors aim to publish the results of their studies in peer-reviewed targeted international journals with a high impact factor as possible, but they are also exposing to ‘predatory’ publishers. Offering some tips to publish papers, identifying relevant journals, and avoiding problems within submitting.</p> <p><b>Results</b> During submitting authors should find suitable journals, assume a risk to encounter ‘predatory’ or ‘hijacked’ journals, know the advantages/ disadvantages of using intermediary publishing services, understand expectations of editor(s), and make a payment.</p> <b>Conclusions</b> The tips help many researchers to publish their papers in relevant journals with cited indexes, and avoid problems within submitting.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kuat Oshakbayev ◽  
Gulnara Bedelbayeva ◽  
Khalit Mustafin ◽  
Attila Tordai

<p><b>Background</b> Authors aim to publish the results of their studies in peer-reviewed targeted international journals with a high impact factor as possible, but they are also exposing to ‘predatory’ publishers. Offering some tips to publish papers, identifying relevant journals, and avoiding problems within submitting.</p> <p><b>Results</b> During submitting authors should find suitable journals, assume a risk to encounter ‘predatory’ or ‘hijacked’ journals, know the advantages/ disadvantages of using intermediary publishing services, understand expectations of editor(s), and make a payment.</p> <b>Conclusions</b> The tips help many researchers to publish their papers in relevant journals with cited indexes, and avoid problems within submitting.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferrán Catalá-López ◽  
Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent ◽  
Lisa Caulley ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable information to inform clinical practice and patient care. We aimed to map the global clinical research publication activity through RCTs related articles in high-impact factor medical journals over the past five decades. Methods Cross-sectional analysis of articles published in the highest ranked medical journals with an impact factor > 10 (according to Journal Citation Reports published in 2017). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE (from inception to December 31, 2017) for all RCTs related articles (e.g. primary RCTs, secondary analyses and methodology papers) published in high-impact factor medical journals. For each included article, raw metadata were abstracted from the Web of Science. A process of standardization was conducted to unify different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription, and/or indexing errors. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of articles, citations, most prolific authors, countries, journals, funding sources and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words were presented. Results We included 39305 articles (period 1965-2017) published in forty journals. The Lancet (n=3593; 9.1%), the Journal of Clinical Oncology (n=3343; 8.5%), and The New England Journal of Medicine (n=3275 articles; 8.3%) published the largest number of RCTs. 154 countries were involved in the production of articles. The global productivity ranking was led by the United States (n=18393 articles), followed by the United Kingdom (n=8028 articles), Canada (n=4548 articles) and Germany (n=4415 articles). Seventeen authors who published 100 or more articles were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Duke University (United States), Harvard University (United States), and McMaster University (Canada). Main funding institutions were the National Institutes of Health (United States), Hoffmann-La Roche (Switzerland), Pfizer (United States), Merck Sharp & Dohme (United States) and Novartis (Switzerland). The 100 most cited RCTs were published in 9 journals, led by The New England Journal of Medicine (n=78 articles), The Lancet (n=9 articles) and JAMA (n=7 articles). These landmark contributions focused on novel methodological approaches (e.g. “Bland-Altman method”) and trials on the management of chronic conditions (e.g. diabetes control, hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women, multiple therapies for diverse cancers, cardiovascular therapies such as lipid-lowering statins, antihypertensive medications, antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy). Conclusions Our analysis identified authors, countries, funding institutions, landmark contributions and high-impact factor medical journals publishing RCTs. Over the last 50 years, publication production in leading medical journals has increased with research leadership of Western countries, but with very limited representation from low and middle-income countries.


Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferrán Catalá-López ◽  
Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent ◽  
Lisa Caulley ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable information to inform clinical practice and patient care. We aimed to map global clinical research publication activity through RCT-related articles in high-impact-factor medical journals over the past five decades. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of articles published in the highest ranked medical journals with an impact factor > 10 (according to Journal Citation Reports published in 2017). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE (from inception to December 31, 2017) for all RCT-related articles (e.g. primary RCTs, secondary analyses and methodology papers) published in high-impact-factor medical journals. For each included article, raw metadata were abstracted from the Web of Science. A process of standardization was conducted to unify the different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription and/or indexing errors. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of articles, citations, most prolific authors, countries, journals, funding sources and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words are presented. Results We included 39,305 articles (for the period 1965–2017) published in forty journals. The Lancet (n = 3593; 9.1%), the Journal of Clinical Oncology (n = 3343; 8.5%) and The New England Journal of Medicine (n = 3275 articles; 8.3%) published the largest number of RCTs. A total of 154 countries were involved in the production of articles. The global productivity ranking was led by the United States (n = 18,393 articles), followed by the United Kingdom (n = 8028 articles), Canada (n = 4548 articles) and Germany (n = 4415 articles). Seventeen authors who had published 100 or more articles were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Duke University (United States), Harvard University (United States) and McMaster University (Canada). The main funding institutions were the National Institutes of Health (United States), Hoffmann-La Roche (Switzerland), Pfizer (United States), Merck Sharp & Dohme (United States) and Novartis (Switzerland). The 100 most cited RCTs were published in nine journals, led by The New England Journal of Medicine (n = 78 articles), The Lancet (n = 9 articles) and JAMA (n = 7 articles). These landmark contributions focused on novel methodological approaches (e.g. the “Bland-Altman method”) and trials on the management of chronic conditions (e.g. diabetes control, hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women, multiple therapies for diverse cancers, cardiovascular therapies such as lipid-lowering statins, antihypertensive medications, and antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy). Conclusions Our analysis identified authors, countries, funding institutions, landmark contributions and high-impact-factor medical journals publishing RCTs. Over the last 50 years, publication production in leading medical journals has increased, with Western countries leading in research but with low- and middle-income countries showing very limited representation.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferrán Catalá-López ◽  
Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent ◽  
Lisa Caulley ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable information to inform clinical practice and patient care. We aimed to map the global clinical research publication activity through RCTs related articles in high-impact factor medical journals over the past five decades. Methods Cross-sectional analysis of articles published in the highest ranked medical journals with an impact factor > 10 (according to Journal Citation Reports published in 2017). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE (from inception to December 31, 2017) for all RCTs related articles (e.g. primary RCTs, secondary analyses and methodology papers) published in high-impact factor medical journals. For each included article, raw metadata were abstracted from the Web of Science. A process of standardization was conducted to unify different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription, and/or indexing errors. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of articles, citations, most prolific authors, countries, journals, funding sources and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words were presented. Results We included 39305 articles (period 1965-2017) published in forty journals. The Lancet (n=3593; 9.1%), the Journal of Clinical Oncology (n=3343; 8.5%), and The New England Journal of Medicine (n=3275 articles; 8.3%) published the largest number of RCTs. 154 countries were involved in the production of articles. The global productivity ranking was led by the United States (n=18393 articles), followed by the United Kingdom (n=8028 articles), Canada (n=4548 articles) and Germany (n=4415 articles). Seventeen authors who published 100 or more articles were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Duke University (United States), Harvard University (United States), and McMaster University (Canada). Main funding institutions were the National Institutes of Health (United States), Hoffmann-La Roche (Switzerland), Pfizer (United States), Merck Sharp & Dohme (United States) and Novartis (Switzerland). The 100 most cited RCTs were published in 9 journals, led by The New England Journal of Medicine (n=78 articles), The Lancet (n=9 articles) and JAMA (n=7 articles). These landmark contributions focused on novel methodological approaches (e.g. “Bland-Altman method”) and trials on the management of chronic conditions (e.g. diabetes control, hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women, multiple therapies for diverse cancers, cardiovascular therapies such as lipid-lowering statins, antihypertensive medications, antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy). Conclusions Our analysis identified authors, countries, funding institutions, landmark contributions and high-impact factor medical journals publishing RCTs. Over the last 50 years, publication production in leading medical journals has increased with research leadership of Western countries, but with very limited representation from low and middle-income countries.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Mohammad Iqbal Khan

Research is indispensable for the growth and development of all disciplines, particularly medical sciences which fundamentally need continuous research and progressive innovation. Writing and reporting scientific discoveries is an important outcome of a researcher. Mostly, editors and reviewers appreciate manuscripts that are easy to read and to edit beside valuable scientific contents. Medical writings have significantly improved in past two decades resulting in increased number of medical journals and quality of reporting. Once research findings are ready to be reported, a researcher makes an educated choice, as to where to get it published. A high impact factor indicates that research findings published in journal are considered highly influential. With stirring zeal and drive, the “Journal of Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University” (JSTMU) is being launched and a dedicated team of editors, advisors and reviewers has been appointed to facilitate the researchers who wish to publish in JSTMU. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 116 (12) ◽  
pp. e165-e168
Author(s):  
Adam M Sheikh ◽  
Heather Y Small ◽  
Charalambos Antoniades ◽  
Tomasz J Guzik

2012 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 714-716
Author(s):  
Mariane Da Cas de Aquim Martins ◽  
Marília Gabriela Linné Netto Carneiro ◽  
Joyce Benck Utzig ◽  
Eleolina Lara Kaled Neta ◽  
Majenna Andrade Pachnicki ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: The qualitative and quantitative scientific output of Brazilian dermatologists in journals of high impact factor is little known. OBJECTIVE: To describe the scientific output of dermatologists from Brazilian institutions in journals of high impact factor. METHODS: The five journals with the highest impact factor in dermatology were analyzed. All articles produced from Brazilian institutions between 1986 and 2010 were compiled and the following aspects were analyzed: position of Brazilian researchers in the list of authors, selected theme, experimental design, studied disease, area of interest and year of publication. RESULTS: Seventy-four articles written with the participation of Brazilian dermatologists have been identified. Upon grouping the articles in five-year periods, an important increase was observed in the Brazilian production from the year 2006 onwards. The dermatologists were placed as second authors in the majority of cases (53.66%). According to the selected theme to be studied, the majority of the articles had a laboratory focus (45.95%). The majority of the articles reported cross-sectional studies or non-controlled clinical trials (both at 17.57%), and pemphigus foliaceus was the most studied disease (29.73%). CONCLUSION: The increase in the number of publications by Brazilian dermatologists over the last years is encouraging, but it is still small in comparison to the total number of articles published in these five periodicals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document