Gender inequities in the online dissemination of scholars' work.

Unbiased science dissemination has the potential to alleviate some of the known gender disparities in academia by exposing female scholars' work to other scientists and the public. And yet, we lack comprehensive understanding of the relationship between gender and science dissemination online. Our large-scale analyses, encompassing half a million scholars, revealed that female scholars' work is mentioned less frequently than male scholars' work in all research areas. When exploring the characteristics associated with online success, we found that the impact of prior work, social capital, and gendered tie formation in coauthorship networks are linked with online success for men, but not for women-even in the areas with the highest female representation. These results suggest that while men's scientific impact and collaboration networks are associated with higher visibility online, there are no universally identifiable facets associated with success for women. Our comprehensive empirical evidence indicates that the gender gap in online science dissemination is coupled with a lack of understanding the characteristics that are linked with female scholars' success, which might hinder efforts to close the gender gap in visibility.

Retracted publications in autism research are mostly concerned with ethical misconduct.

BACKGROUND: As the prevalence of autism appears to increase, more research to guide effective diagnosis and intervention practices is needed. Findings disseminated through peer-reviewed publications are critical, but the number of retractions continues to rise. An understanding of retracted publications is imperative to ensure the body of evidence is corrected and current. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this analysis were to summarize key characteristics of retracted publications in autism research, examine the length of time between publication and retraction, and assess the extent journals are adhering to publishing ethical guidelines for reporting retracted articles. METHODS: We searched five databases through 2021 (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch). RESULTS: A total of 25 retracted articles were included in the analysis. Ethical misconduct accounted for the majority of retractions rather than scientific error. The shortest time to retraction was 2 months and the longest length was 144 months. DISCUSSION: The time lag between publication and retraction since 2018 has improved considerably. Nineteen of the articles had retraction notices (76%), whereas six articles did not have a notice (24%). CONCLUSION: These findings summarize errors of previous retractions and illuminate opportunities for researchers, journal publishers and librarians to learn from retracted publications.

The transformative impact of large language models on medical writing and publishing: current applications, challenges and future directions.

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly transforming medical writing and publishing. This review article focuses on experimental evidence to provide a comprehensive overview of the current applications, challenges, and future implications of LLMs in various stages of academic research and publishing process. Global surveys reveal a high prevalence of LLM usage in scientific writing, with both potential benefits and challenges associated with its adoption. LLMs have been successfully applied in literature search, research design, writing assistance, quality assessment, citation generation, and data analysis. LLMs have also been used in peer review and publication processes, including manuscript screening, generating review comments, and identifying potential biases. To ensure the integrity and quality of scholarly work in the era of LLM-assisted research, responsible artificial intelligence (AI) use is crucial. Researchers should prioritize verifying the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated content, maintain transparency in the use of LLMs, and develop collaborative human-AI workflows. Reviewers should focus on higher-order reviewing skills and be aware of the potential use of LLMs in manuscripts. Editorial offices should develop clear policies and guidelines on AI use and foster open dialogue within the academic community. Future directions include addressing the limitations and biases of current LLMs, exploring innovative applications, and continuously updating policies and practices in response to technological advancements. Collaborative efforts among stakeholders are necessary to harness the transformative potential of LLMs while maintaining the integrity of medical writing and publishing.

The Medical Institutional Repositories in Libraries (MIRL) Symposium: a blueprint designed in response to a community of practice need.

Background: Health sciences libraries in medical schools, academic health centers, health care networks, and hospitals have established institutional repositories (IRs) to showcase their research achievements, increase visibility, expand the reach of institutional scholarship, and disseminate unique content. Newer roles for IRs include publishing open access journals, tracking researcher productivity, and serving as repositories for data sharing. Many repository managers oversee their IR with limited assistance from others at their institution. Therefore, IR practitioners find it valuable to network and learn from colleagues at other institutions. Case Presentation: This case report describes the genesis and implementation of a new initiative specifically designed for a health sciences audience: the Medical Institutional Repositories in Libraries (MIRL) Symposium. Six medical librarians from hospitals and academic institutions in the U.S. organized the inaugural symposium held virtually in November 2021. The goal was to fill a perceived gap in conference programming for IR practitioners in health settings. Themes of the 2021 and subsequent 2022 symposium included IR management, increasing readership and engagement, and platform migration. Post-symposium surveys were completed by 73/238 attendees (31%) in 2021 and by 62/180 (34%) in 2022. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Discussion: Participant responses in post-symposium surveys rated MIRL highly. The MIRL planning group intends to continue the symposium and hopes MIRL will steadily evolve, build community among IR practitioners in the health sciences, and expand the conversation around best practices for digital archiving of institutional content. The implementation design of MIRL serves as a blueprint for collaboratively bringing together a professional community of practice.

The popularisation of self-care: Tracing the dissemination of Orem's Self-Care Deficiency Nursing Theory into the scientific disciplines.

BACKGROUND: Bibliometric methods may be used to examine research trends, and information visualisation techniques are useful in illustrating the diffusion of knowledge and how theories are applied. OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to illustrate how Orem's Self-Care Deficiency Nursing Theory (SCDNT) has been cited and applied in nursing science and beyond. METHODS: A bibliometric analysis examined scientific publications that cited Orem's nursing theory. In addition, the diffusion of SCDNT was assessed using data visualisation methods and integration scores of SCDNT versions were calculated to define trends in its theoretical usage in other scientific domains. RESULTS: The information visualisation demonstrated increased usage of SCDTN in different disciplines. Integration scores demonstrated that the scientific community still recognises and uses versions of SCDTN. DISCUSSION: Studying citation patterns helps to identify which publications are still cited and relevant, as well as illustrating the dissemination of theory. Findings may be used in the collection weeding of SCDTN book versions. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provided nursing scientists with a better conceptual understanding of SCDNT diffusion and development. For academic library managers, the findings identify which SCDNT should be retained for historical interest and curriculum needs.

New to health information, library or knowledge work .

Dissertations into Practice is changing. Details on how those new to health information, library and knowledge work can get involved coming shortly.

Tracking Openness and Topic Evolution of COVID-19 Publications January 2020-March 2021: Comprehensive Bibliometric and Topic Modeling Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak highlighted the importance of rapid access to research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate research communication related to COVID-19, the level of openness of papers, and the main topics of research into this disease. METHODS: Open access (OA) uptake (typologies, license use) and the topic evolution of publications were analyzed from the start of the pandemic (January 1, 2020) until the end of a year of widespread lockdown (March 1, 2021). RESULTS: The sample included 95,605 publications; 94.1% were published in an OA form, 44% of which were published as Bronze OA. Among these OA publications, 42% do not have a license, which can limit the number of citations and thus the impact. Using a topic modeling approach, we found that articles in Hybrid and Green OA publications are more focused on patients and their effects, whereas the strategy to combat the pandemic adopted by different countries was the main topic of articles selecting publication via the Gold OA route. CONCLUSIONS: Although OA scientific production has increased, some weaknesses in OA practice, such as lack of licensing or under-researched topics, still hold back its effective use for further research.

Toward scientific dissemination of undergraduate thesis in physical therapy programs - a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The execution of undergraduate thesis is a period in which students have an opportunity to develop their scientific knowledge. However, many barriers could prevent the learning process. This cross-sectional study aimed to analyze the scientific dissemination of results from undergraduate theses in physical therapy programs and verify the existence of barriers and challenges in the preparation of undergraduate thesis. Second, to investigate whether project characteristics and thesis development barriers were associated with the dissemination of undergraduate thesis results. METHODS: Physical therapists who graduated as of 2015, from 50 different educational institutions, answered an online questionnaire about barriers faced during the execution of undergraduate thesis and about scientific dissemination of their results. RESULTS: Of 324 participants, 43% (n = 138) of participants disseminated their results, and the main form of dissemination was publishing in national journals (18%, n = 58). Regarding the barriers, 76% (n = 246) of participants reported facing some difficulties, and the main challenge highlighted was the lack of scientific knowledge (28%, n = 91). Chances of dissemination were associated with barriers related to scientific understanding and operational factors, such as the type of institution, institutional facilities, and involvement with other projects. CONCLUSION: Scientific knowledge seems to be a determining factor for the good development of undergraduate theses. In addition, it is clear the need to stimulate more qualified dissemination that reaches a larger audience. Changes in operational and teaching factors may improve the undergraduate thesis quality. However, the importance of rethinking scientific education within physical therapy programs draws attention.

Open access and predatory publishing: a survey of the publishing practices of academic pharmacists and nurses in the United States.

Objective: Academics are under great pressure to publish their research, the rewards for which are well known (tenure, promotion, grant funding, professional prestige). As open access publishing gains acceptance as a publishing option, researchers may choose a "predatory publisher." The purpose of this study is to investigate the motivations and rationale of pharmacy and nursing academics in the United States to publish in open access journals that may be considered "predatory." Methods: A 26-item questionnaire was programmed in Qualtrics and distributed electronically to approximately 4,500 academic pharmacists and nurses, 347 of whom completed questionnaires (~8%). Pairwise correlations were performed followed by a logistic regression to evaluate statistical associations between participant characteristics and whether participants had ever paid an article processing fee (APF). Results: Participants who had published more articles, were more familiar with predatory publishing, and who were more concerned about research metrics and tenure were more likely to have published in open access journals. Moderate to high institutional research intensity has an impact on the likelihood of publishing open access. The majority of participants who acknowledged they had published in a predatory journal took no action after realizing the journal was predatory and reported no negative impact on their career for having done so. Conclusion: The results of this study provide data and insight into publication decisions made by pharmacy and nursing academics. Gaining a better understanding of who publishes in predatory journals and why can help address the problems associated with predatory publishing at the root.

Dr. Lindberg and scholarly publishing.

Donald A.B. Lindberg M.D., Director of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) from August 1984 to March 2015, had a remarkable vision for NLM's scope, goals, and function. This vision resulted in many external partnerships and initiatives with the publishing industry, commercial and non-profit, journal editors, and professional organizations. These partnerships ranged from ongoing collaboration and dialogue, such as the NLM Publisher's Committee and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). to the more practical, such as the creation of HINARI and the Emergency Access Initiative (EAI). Dr. Lindberg fostered partnerships outside the NLM to expand the use and reach of Library resources, including MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov to support innovations in the processes that build them, and to improve the quality of biomedical journals. Dr. Lindberg also encouraged the use of technology to enhance medical information and supported the early development of fully interactive publications. Attitudes that contained a measure of skepticism and distrust faded as collaborators came to have a better understanding of both NLM and their partners. This chapter discusses these relationships and accomplishments that NLM achieved working with publishers and other creators and disseminators of medical information under Dr. Lindberg's leadership.

Mapping the literature on primary care research reporting: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Despite broad efforts to improve the reporting of biomedical research, no reporting guideline exists for primary care (PC) research. Little is known about current reporting practices or how well reports meet the needs of varied users in PC. OBJECTIVE: To map the published literature on PC research reporting: quality, strengths and weaknesses, recommendations and efforts to improve reporting. METHODS: Scoping review of literature across seven major databases and search engines to identify all articles on PC research reporting published in English, 2000-20. An additional secondary search of references of these 25 articles and consideration of expert panel suggestions. Structured data extraction by multiple reviewers using a predetermined form. RESULTS: Search yielded 2847 unique titles, of which 126 underwent full-text review and 25 met inclusion criteria. Publications included opinion pieces (9), systematic reviews (5), methods articles (2), literature reviews (4), qualitative studies (4) and surveys (1). Studies focussed on a variety of topics and research methods. All publications identified the need for improved reporting and recommended items to include in reports. Most commonly, publications cited the need for more detailed reporting on the context of study interventions, clinical settings and health care systems. Most publications endorsed the use of reporting guidelines and recognized the unique needs of PC research reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Published research and opinion identify unique needs for PC research reports and support new guidance to improve the validity, generalizability and application of study findings.

Doctors and health scientists recognize the need to improve the way they report their research. Despite the key role of primary care (PC) in strong health care systems, none of the many reporting guidelines focuses on PC research. To understand what is known about reporting PC research, we systematically searched all scientific articles published in English 2000­20. We studied the 25 key articles, which dealt with a great variety of patients, populations, medical problems and research methods. These articles identified needs for improvement and suggested items to include or ways to communicate research findings more effectively to the variety of readers who must put new research into practice to improve patient care and community health. These readers­practicing clinicians, researchers, patients, teachers and policymakers­need more practical details to understand the context and setting where the research took place and the patients were treated. Readers need better reporting of context to help them judge how they can apply the new research knowledge in their own practices. This review helped identify items to include and ways to improve research reports that can help develop new guidelines for PC research reports.

Supporting, enabling and empowering.

When you think about a journal you probably think of it in terms of its interactions with authors, but relations extend beyond this and are embodied in the actions and values of the editorial team and board. The Health Information and Libraries Journal editorial team and board pride themselves in the support they provide to enable and build confidence in the contributing authors, and the referees who collaborate with them by providing constructive peer review.

Bibliometric analysis confirms expected trends in consumer health information publications.

BACKGROUND: This study provides an overview of consumer health information (CHI) scholarly communication trends. OBJECTIVES: To explore CHI publications trends, journal citations, prolific authors, countries of origin, and distribution of CHI publications. METHODS: A bibliometric analysis was used; 8953 records from the Web of Science (WoS) and peer-reviewed journal articles from databases, including LISA, MEDLINE, ERIC, PREMEDLINE and EMBASE were analysed. RESULTS: Publications on CHI rapidly increased from 1980 to 2019, especially during the 1990s and 2000s. Most journals that have published CHI research are based in North America and Europe. CONCLUSION: The increase in the CHI literature corresponds with that in Internet usage in the 2000s, and explains the availability of CHI content online. This trend is associated with the widespread adoption of personal computers (PCs) and other Internet-enabled gadgets.

History of the German-language ENT journals.

In 1864, the worldwide oldest journal in an area of the later established specialty of otorhinolaryngology was founded as the German Archiv für Ohrenheilkunde ("Archive of Otology") by its first editors Anton von Tröltsch (Würzburg), Adam Politzer (Vienna), and Hermann Schwartze (Halle/S.). Ear, nose, and throat (ENT) topics had previously been published in universal medical journals. In the next few decades, numerous journals in the field of ENT were founded, the eventful history of which is presented up to the present day. Particular attention is paid to the historical and personal context of the editors of newly founded magazines and their publishers. The journal landscape, which was changing through acquisitions and mergers of publishers, is described in detail. The merging of the specialties of otology and laryngo-rhinology in Germany, which lasted until the 1920s, had a profound influence on journal titles and contents. An attempt is made to present the most important titles in their historical development. All the important editors of the German ENT journals are mentioned, although it was not possible to include the names of the editors of the current journals, which are becoming more and more numerous. One chapter deals exclusively with the development of journal publishers. The inserted tables and figures will help to resolve some of the confusion caused by repeated similar names of journals by showing their historical development.

[History of the German-language ENT journals. German version]. / Geschichte der deutschsprachigen HNO-Zeitschriften.

In 1864, the worldwide oldest journal in an area of the later established specialty of otorhinolaryngology was founded as the German Archiv für Ohrenheilkunde ("Archive of Otology") by its first editors Anton von Tröltsch (Würzburg), Adam Politzer (Vienna), and Hermann Schwartze (Halle/S.). Ear, nose, and throat (ENT) topics had previously been published in universal medical journals. In the next few decades, numerous journals in the field of ENT were founded, the eventful history of which is presented up to the present day. Particular attention is paid to the historical and personal context of the editors of newly founded magazines and their publishers. The journal landscape, which was changing through acquisitions and mergers of publishers, is described in detail. The merging of the specialties of otology and laryngo-rhinology in Germany, which lasted until the 1920s, had a profound influence on journal titles and contents. An attempt is made to present the most important titles in their historical development. All the important editors of the German ENT journals are mentioned, although it was not possible to include the names of the editors of the current journals, which are becoming more and more numerous. One chapter deals exclusively with the development of journal publishers. The inserted tables and figures will help to resolve some of the confusion caused by repeated similar names of journals by showing their historical development.

Writing a compelling integrated discussion: a guide for integrated discussions in article-based theses and dissertations.

Article-based theses and dissertations are increasingly being used in nursing and the health sciences as an alternate format to the traditional five-chapter monograph. A unique chapter in the article-based thesis is the integrated discussion, which differs in breadth and depth as compared to the discussion for a traditional thesis monograph or journal article. For many students and faculty, the integrated discussion is a challenging chapter to write, with minimal or no published guidance available. In this article, we offer a four-step approach with templates for planning and writing an integrated discussion. We also share several lessons learned with examples from published theses and dissertations. Writing an integrated discussion can be facilitated and written more efficiently by developing a clear and detailed outline of the chapter and broad discussion points prior to drafting the text, to achieve a higher-level synthesis, analysis, and interpretation of the overall significance of the thesis findings.

Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The increase in the number of predatory journals puts scholarly communication at risk. In order to guard against publication in predatory journals, authors may use checklists to help detect predatory journals. We believe there are a large number of such checklists yet it is uncertain whether these checklists contain similar content. We conducted a systematic review to identify checklists that help to detect potential predatory journals and examined and compared their content and measurement properties. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Web of Science and Library, and Information Science & Technology Abstracts (January 2012 to November 2018); university library websites (January 2019); and YouTube (January 2019). We identified sources with original checklists used to detect potential predatory journals published in English, French or Portuguese. Checklists were defined as having instructions in point form, bullet form, tabular format or listed items. We excluded checklists or guidance on recognizing "legitimate" or "trustworthy" journals. To assess risk of bias, we adapted five questions from A Checklist for Checklists tool a priori as no formal assessment tool exists for the type of review conducted. RESULTS: Of 1528 records screened, 93 met our inclusion criteria. The majority of included checklists to identify predatory journals were in English (n = 90, 97%), could be completed in fewer than five minutes (n = 68, 73%), included a mean of 11 items (range = 3 to 64) which were not weighted (n = 91, 98%), did not include qualitative guidance (n = 78, 84%), or quantitative guidance (n = 91, 98%), were not evidence-based (n = 90, 97%) and covered a mean of four of six thematic categories. Only three met our criteria for being evidence-based, i.e. scored three or more "yes" answers (low risk of bias) on the risk of bias tool. CONCLUSION: There is a plethora of published checklists that may overwhelm authors looking to efficiently guard against publishing in predatory journals. The continued development of such checklists may be confusing and of limited benefit. The similarity in checklists could lead to the creation of one evidence-based tool serving authors from all disciplines.

The Archivesof Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at 100: A Century of Authorship.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the authors who have contributed articles to the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (APM&R) over the 100 years of its existence. DESIGN: Extraction of relevant information from a sample of APM&R articles. SETTING: Not applicable. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 4933 authors contributing to 1787 articles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of authors and their gender, professional education, and country of residence. RESULTS: The average number of authors per article increased from 1.1 in 1922 to 5.8 in 2017. The percentage of women authors grew from <5% to about 40%. In 1922 the majority of authors had an MD degree (85%); this declined to <30% by 2017, while the percentage of authors with a PhD grew from about 10% to about 30%. The percentage of contributors with a bachelor's degree initially was about 1%, grew to 13%, and then declined again. While in APM&R's early years, >90% of authors were from the United States, this percentage went into a steep decline beginning in about 1997 and now is around 35%. CONCLUSIONS: The APM&R has seen major transformations in the nature of its contributors over a century of publication; many of these parallel the changes seen in other areas of health care and medical science, but some characteristics and shifts (especially in gender and level of training of its authors) appear unique.

The Archivesof Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at 100: Its Development Set in Historical Context.

The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation was born as a radiology journal, and over its century of existence it has gone through various names and owners while shifting its contents from radiology to physical medicine to physical medicine and rehabilitation. These developments are sketched in light of the growth and eventual merger of physical medicine and rehabilitation in the United States and societal historical developments in the United States and elsewhere.

Social media for research, education and practice in rheumatology.

Online social networking offers numerous opportunities for continuing medical education, professional development, and scholarly collaboration. Available social media channels proved useful for expanding education and research perspectives, particularly in rapidly developing academic disciplines such as rheumatology. Although there are numerous advantages of social media, busy clinicians should be aware of some drawbacks related to misinformation, unethical promotion, and unprofessional behavior in globally expanding platforms. Filtering credible and expert-proven information by skilled users is, therefore, increasingly important. Enforcing ethical norms and advancing professional etiquette in the field is strongly advisable. This article overviews the advantages and shortcomings of social media and reflects on available platforms for education and research in rheumatology.