Preserving the Integrity of Citations and References by All Stakeholders of Science Communication

Citations to scholarly items are building bricks for multidisciplinary science communication. Citation analyses are currently influencing individual career advancement and ranking of academic and research institutions worldwide. This article overviews the involvement of scientific authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, indexers, and learned associations in the citing and referencing to preserve the integrity of science communication. Authors are responsible for thorough bibliographic searches to select relevant references for their articles, comprehend main points, and cite them in an ethical way. Reviewers and editors may perform additional searches and recommend missing essential references. Publishers, in turn, are in a position to instruct their authors over the citations and references, provide tools for validation of references, and open access to bibliographies. Publicly available reference lists bear important information about the novelty and relatedness of the scholarly items with the published literature. Few editorial associations have dealt with the issue of citations and properly managed references. As a prime example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued in December 2014 an updated set of recommendations on the need for citing primary literature and avoiding unethical references, which are applicable to the global scientific community. With the exponential growth of literature and related references, it is critically important to define functions of all stakeholders of science communication in curbing the issue of irrational and unethical citations and thereby improve the quality and indexability of scholarly journals.     

For Free or for Fee? Dilemma of Small Scientific Journals

Biomedical publishing is becoming increasingly dominated by multinational companies, advertising research articles at the international market, presenting them electronically through web-based services, and distributing them to readers-consumers. It seems that they will soon become the sole publishers for the majority of biomedical journals. In the past decade, however, we witnessed a quiet revolution in the whole structure of scientific communication, influenced by new technologies and initiatives such as Open Access, PubMedCentral, PLoS, and BioMedCentral. The Croatian Medical Journal (CMJ) has recently been approached by two major publishing companies and offered to become one of the journals in their group. The editorial decision was to join neither of the publishers. We felt that the decision had to be explained to our readers by defining CMJ's position in global scientific and medical journal publishing. Our experience may be similar to that of the many biomedical journals which find themselves in a dilemma whether to join major publishers or not.     

把好质量关,不断提高期刊的档次

《解剖科学进展》通过建立科学的论文评审和编校制度、提高编辑的综合素质、现代化编辑出版手段、严格执行刊物的学术规范和编排标准化以及实行刊物审读制度,不断提高刊物的质量,如今已成为我国基础医学期刊中有影响力、有竞争力的核心期刊之一。     

A Scopus-Based Analysis of Publication Activity in Kazakhstan from 2010 to 2015: Positive Trends,Concerns, and Possible Solutions

The article analyzes the publication activity of scientific authors from Kazakhstan based on Scopus and SCImago Journal & Country Rank data from 2010 to 2015. The number of indexed multidisciplinary and medical articles from the country has been steadily growing from 2011 onward and this can be due to the adoption of the new Law on Science in that year. Several regulatory legal acts have been issued in recent years aimed at improving the quality of local journals and the international recognition of academic degrees and titles. Publication activity of scientific authors from Kazakhstan was found to be higher than that from other countries in the Central Asian region. However, there are still many unresolved issues related to the English language barrier, lack of indexing status of local journals, and poor topical education on science writing and editing. As such, the number of articles published in ''predatory'' journals remains sizable, and there are concerns over authors'' negligence and plagiarism. The global solution to the discussed problems may be achieved by educating researchers, authors, reviewers, and editors.     

Good editorial practice: editors as educators

There may be valuable research going on in the developing and financially less-privileged countries, but it usually does not reach international visibility, in spite of a large number of scientific journals in these countries. Such journals are not only invisible but, by perpetuating a vicious circle of inadequacy, may be directly damaging to the local science and research culture. We call for an international action to help journal editors in less privileged countries. International associations of editors may be leaders of these activities by defining, promoting, and perhaps controlling good editorial practice, as a main criterion for international recognition of a journal. However, the editors of small journals have the power and moral obligation to become a stronghold of quality and advancement in their scientific community. Their educational "tools" are editorial integrity and author-friendly policy. Editors can teach the authors study design, statistical analysis, precision, punctuality, research integrity, style and format of writing, and other aspects of scientific communication. The editors of "big", mainstream scientific journals can act as global educators, teaching and providing guidance to editors of small journals. The editors from developed countries as leaders, and editors from less advantageous environments as teachers are the key figures in shaping research communication in less privileged scientific communities.     

Essential Components of Educational Programs on Biomedical Writing,Editing, and Publishing

The primary objective of educational programs on biomedical writing, editing, and publishing is to nurture ethical skills among local and international researchers and editors from diverse professional backgrounds. The mechanics, essential components, and target outcomes of these programs are described in this article. The mechanics covers the objectives, design, benefits, duration, participants and qualifications, program formats, administrative issues, and mentorship. The essential components consist of three core schedules: Schedule I Basic aspects of biomedical writing, editing, and communications; Schedule II Essential skills in biomedical writing, editing, and publishing; and Schedule III Interactive lectures on relevant topics. The target outcomes of the programs comprise knowledge acquisition, skills development, paper write-up, and journal publication. These programs add to the prestige and academic standing of the host institutions.

Graphical Abstract

相似文献   

Revealing the faults in medical journals

Medical journals hold an exalted position in medicine, but have many shortcomings. This perspective reviews some of the shortcomings of medical journals which are primarily related to inexperience, bias, and commercialism. The issues discussed include the uncertain mission of the traditional medical journal in the modern digital age, the inherent inexperience of voluntary editorial boards, the weaknesses and capricious nature of decisions made by the peer-review process, the uneven value of most journal articles, the bias in what gets submitted and published in journals, the misunderstanding about the criteria for authorship, the misunderstanding of the need for ethical review board approval of studies, the misunderstanding of the need for informed consent for research from patients and ethical review boards, the various sources of assistance to editors and authors in dealing with the many ethical issues arising in the publication process, the commercialization and manipulation of medical journals by industry, the prevalent and complex financial entanglements of authors with industry, and the imperfect impact factor, which has the potential to be abused. The perspective concludes with theorization of the role of medical journals in the future. Readers need to scrutinize data in the literature carefully and interpret the discussions and conclusions critically, as there are biases in what is published in medical journals. The editors dedicate this article to the memory of Prof. Ludwik Hirszfeld, founder of the Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences (Wrocław, Poland) and its two journals (Postępy Higieny i Medycyny Doświadczalnej in 1949, Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis in 1953), who died fifty-five years ago.     

How psychotherapists handle treatment errors – an ethical analysis

In studies publishing identifying personal information, obtaining consent is regarded as necessary, as it is impossible to ensure complete anonymity. However, current journal practices around specific points to consider when obtaining consent, the contents of consent forms and how consent forms are managed have not yet been fully examined. This study was conducted to identify potential issues surrounding consent to publish identifying personal information. Content analysis was carried out on instructions for authors and consent forms developed by academic journals in four fields (as classified by Journal Citation Reports): medicine general and internal, genetics and heredity, pediatrics, and psychiatry. An online questionnaire survey of editors working for journals that require the submission of consent forms was also conducted. Instructions for authors were reviewed for 491 academic journals (132 for medicine general and internal, 147 for genetics and heredity, 100 for pediatrics, and 112 for psychiatry). Approximately 40% (203: 74 for medicine general and internal, 31 for genetics and heredity, 58 for pediatrics, and 40 for psychiatry) stated that subject consent was necessary. The submission of consent forms was required by 30% (154) of the journals studied, and 10% (50) provided their own consent forms for authors to use. Two journals mentioned that the possible effects of publication on subjects should be considered. Many journal consent forms mentioned the difficulties in ensuring complete anonymity of subjects, but few addressed the study objective, the subjects’ right to refuse consent and the withdrawal of consent. The main reason for requiring the submission of consent forms was to confirm that consent had been obtained. Approximately 40% of journals required subject consent to be obtained. However, differences were observed depending on the fields. Specific considerations were not always documented. There is a need to address issues around the study objective, subjects’ right to refuse consent and the withdrawal of consent. Whether responsibility for ensuring that the consent form has been signed lies with publishers also needs to be discussed.     

A matter of trust

Recent instances of potential conflicts of interest involving authors and journal editors may tarnish public confidence in the integrity of science journals.     

Systematic and Open Identification of Researchers and Authors: Focus on Open Researcher and Contributor ID

Unique identifiers of researchers and authors can help all stakeholders of scientific communications improve their workflows. There have been several attempts to establish professional networks of scholars and list their scholarly achievements on digital platforms. Some of these platforms such as Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge and PubMed are searched to pick relevant peer reviewers, assess authors'' publication history or choose suitable candidates for research and academic projects. However, each of these hubs has its specific applications, limiting the universal use for permanent tagging of researcher profiles. The Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) initiative, launched in 2012, is aimed at registering scholarly contributors and averting the persistent ambiguity of recorded author names. The ORCID registry is growing fast and integrating with other ID-generating platforms, thereby increasing the functionality of the integrated systems. ORCID identifiers are increasingly used for selecting peer reviewers and acknowledging various scholarly contributions (e.g., published articles, reviewer comments, conference presentations). The initiative offers unique opportunities for transparent disclosures of author contributions and competing interests and improving ethical standards of research, editing, and publishing.