APAKAH PANDEMI COVID-19 BERPENGARUH TERHADAP PRODUKTIVITAS PENELITIAN TENTANG PERPUSTAKAAN PADA JURNAL INTERNASIONAL?

Corona virus pandemic restricts public activities. Libraries as information provider can help long-distance learning process due to Corona. Librarians as library operators are demanded to innovate through research and publication. This study aims to analyse if Corona virus pandemic influences productivity of Indonesian authors’ publication in accredited international journal. This study uses quantitative approach with secondary data analysis. Sample for this research are papers/scientific articles published with the keyword or topic “library”, the keyword or topic “information science”, and whose corresponding author is from Indonesia. Results of this research shows that Corona virus pandemic did not significantly influence publication productivity. In addition, scientific article on information science was more preferable than topic on library.

Factors to Improve Publication Productivity in Russian Universities

One of the most important conditions for the effectiveness of science is the motivation of academic staff of universities as key and direct producers of new knowledge. The purpose of the article was to substantiate the factors of efficiency in managing the publication activity of Russian universities. The nature and density of the relationship between the number of scientific publications and the level of citation of 19 leading countries in the world, including Russia, were determined by means of statistical analysis and the method of clusters. It has been empirically proven that the priority model for the development of publication activity should be an intensive model, which aims at improving the quality of scientific publications and the level of their citation. Moreover, a survey of 1573 young scientists (under the age of 39) and 2461 senior scientists from 14 universities in Russia was conducted. It investigated the factors of effective management of the publication activity at Russian universities. The results contribute to a better understanding on how Russian universities can activate and foster the flow of high-quality publication outputs by their researchers.

An international bibliometric study of scientific articles on intracranial aneurysms

Objectives The number of original scientific researches on intracranial aneurysms has risen over the last 30 years. Despite the rise in the number of articles, there is no up-to-date exhaustive bibliometric research in the literature. This study aimed to contribute to the literature via a bibliometric analysis of the original scientific researches on intracranial aneurysms published over the last 30 years. Methods The literature review was done using the Web of Science. All articles and its citations containing aneurysm keywords were analyzed in the "title" section of articles published in the research areas: Neurosciences Neurology during 1980–2019. Correlation analyses between the number of articles produced by the countries and their economic and development indicators of gross domestic product, and Human Development Index were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Linear regression analysis was utilized to estimate the number of articles to be published in the future. Results There were a total of 21,673 publications on intracranial aneurysms. Of these publications, 13,371 (61.7%) were articles. The three countries that produced the most articles were the USA (4098), Japan (2668), and China (937). A statistically significant correlation was found between the development indicators of world countries and publication productivity ( p<0.001). The three journals that produced the most publications were Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery, and American Journal of Neuroradiology. The most cited article was published in Journal of Neurosurgery. Conclusion This bibliometric study provides a collection of data that will help design future research on intracranial aneurysms more efficiently and make innovations at greater speed.

Mentoring Experiences and Publication Productivity among Early Career Biomedical Investigators and Trainees

Objective: To identify which mentoring domains influence publication productivity among early career researchers and trainees and whether publication productivity differs between underrepresented minority (URM) and well-represented groups (WRGs). The mentoring aspects that promote publica­tion productivity remain unclear. Advancing health equity requires a diverse workforce, yet URM trainees are less likely to publish and URM investigators are less likely to ob­tain federal research grants, relative to WRG counterparts.Participants: Early career biomedical investigators and trainees from the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), N=115.Methods: A mentoring-focused online follow-up survey was administered to respondents of the NRMN Annual Survey who self-identified as mentees. Publications were identified from a public database and validated with participant CV data. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested the as­sociations of publication productivity with mentoring domains.Results: URM investigators and trainees had fewer publications (M = 7.3) than their WRG counterparts (M = 13.8). Controlling for career stage and social characteristics, those who worked on funded projects, and received grant-writing or research mentorship, had a higher probability of any publications. Controlling for URM status, gender, and career stage, mentorship on grant-writing and funding was positively as­sociated with publication count (IRR=1.72). Holding career stage, gender, and mentor­ing experiences constant, WRG investigators and trainees had more publications than their URM counterparts (IRR=1.66).Conclusions: Grant-writing mentorship is particularly important for publica­tion productivity. Future research should investigate whether grant-writing mentor­ship differentially impacts URM and WRG investigators and should investigate how and why grant-writing mentorship fosters increased publication productivity. Ethn Dis. 2021;31(2):273-282; doi:10.18865/ed.31.2.273

Thirty-Year Pediatric Residency Research and Publication Productivity: Association with Research Funding

Background: The Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University has developed a residency research program and continuously improved the curriculum. The main source of funds for resident’s research projects comes from the Faculty of Medicine. This fund was once limited, but it has been gradually increased. Objective: To assessed publication productivity during the past 30 years and its association with research funding. Materials and Methods: The present study was a retrospective cohort study, using the database containing detailed information on scholarly projects of the Ramathibodi’s pediatric residents between 1983 and 2012. Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors that could be associated with publication productivity and types of study design were performed. Results: Three hundred forty-nine projects were included. These projects were categorized into three groups based upon research funding, no fund (F0) (n=255), funded at 50,000 THB or less (F1) (n=67), and funded at more than 50,000 THB (F2) (n=27). The demographic data of residents and mentors among the three groups were not significantly different. A significant increase in the number of publications was positively associated with more funds. The percentage of publications rose with increasing funds (16.5%, 28.4%, and 33.3% in F0, F1, and F2, respectively) (p=0.019). The percentages of the prospective study were also increased with increasing funds (31.4% to 46.3%, and 48.1% in F0, F1, and F2, respectively) (p=0.022). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that funds was the only factor associated with percentage of publications (odds ratio [OR] 2.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07 to 6.03) and with percentage of prospective study design (OR 7.16, 95% CI 3.50 to 14.66). Funds was an independent factor associated with journal impact factor (adjusted OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.41 to 11.87). Conclusion: An increase in pediatric residency research funding was a major factor associated with an increase in publication productivity. Keywords: Education, Pediatrics, Medical, Resident, Grant