Viral modernity? Epidemics, infodemics, and the ‘bioinformational' paradigm

Viral modernity is a concept based upon the nature of viruses, the ancient and critical role they play in evolution and culture, and the basic application to understanding the role of information and forms of bioinformation in the social world. The concept draws a close association between viral biology on the one hand, and information science on the other – it is an illustration and prime example of bioinformationalism that brings together two of the most powerful forces that now drive cultural evolution. The concept of viral modernity applies to viral technologies, codes and ecosystems in information, publishing, education and emerging knowledge (journal) systems. This paper traces the relationship between epidemics, quarantine, and public health management and outlines elements of viral-digital philosophy (VDP) based on the fusion of living and technological systems. We discuss Covid-19 as a ‘bioinformationalist' response that represents historically unprecedented level of sharing information from the sequencing of the genome to testing for a vaccination. Finally, we look at the US response to Covid-19 through the lens of infodemics and post-truth. The paper is followed by three open reviews, which further refine its conclusions as they relate to (educational) philosophy and the notion of the virus as Pharmakon.

AC317 The Plant Phenome Journal editorial board

An initial quality control check was completed for the journal and magazine content and a check of the books content is currently under way. Authors make edits directly to the HTML article file, which cuts down time to publication and reduces errors introduced during typesetting. [...]far we've received positive response and hope to expand this program to additional titles. [...]the group reviewed mismatched guidelines and adopted a standardized Scientific Misconduct Statement for all 13 journals to create uniformity across the journal collection. The JIF is one tool used to evaluate a journal's relative importance when compared with other journals in the same study area.

Editors in Chief of Public Health Reports, 1878-2022: Men and Women Who Shaped the Discussion of Public Health Practice From 1918 Influenza to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Public Health Reports (PHR), the official journal of the Office of the US Surgeon General and US Public Health Service, is the oldest public health journal in the United States. Considering its heritage through the eyes of its past editors in chief (EICs), many of whom have been influential public health figures, can provide a fresh point of view on US public health history, of which the journal has been an integral part. Here, we reconstruct the timeline of past PHR EICs and identify women among them. METHODS: We reconstructed the PHR EIC timeline by reviewing the journal's previous mastheads and its articles describing leadership transitions. For each EIC, we identified dates in office, concurrent job titles, key contributions, and other important developments. RESULTS: PHR had 25 EIC transitions in 109 years of its history, during which a single individual in charge of the journal could be identified. Only 5 identifiable EICs were women, who served as EIC for approximately one-quarter of the journal's traceable history (28 of 109 years). PHR's longest-serving EIC was a woman named Marian P. Tebben (1974-1994). CONCLUSIONS: PHR history revealed frequent EIC transitions and a low representation of women among its EICs. Mapping the timeline of past EICs of a historic public health journal can yield valuable insights into the workings of US public health, especially in the area of building a research evidence base.

Fast-Tracking of Publication Times of Otolaryngology Papers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

To study the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on journal processing times before publication in the field of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (ORL-HNS). Online search of original papers published in selected ORL-HNS journals in terms of times from submission to acceptance (S-A), acceptance to first online publication (A-P), and submission to online publication (S-P). Papers were divided into those published in the pre-COVID-19 era and those during the COVID-19 era. The latter were further divided into unrelated to COVID-19 and related to COVID-19. A total of 487 articles from 5 selected ORL-HNS journals were included, of which 236 (48.5%) were published during the pre-COVID-19 era and 251 (51.5%) were published during the COVID-19 era. Among them, 180 (37%) papers were not related to COVID-19, and 71 (14.5%) were related to COVID-19. The S-A duration of COVID-19-related articles was significantly shorter compared to papers submitted in the pre-COVID-19 era and to papers submitted in the COVID-19 era but unrelated to COVID-19 (median 6-34 days compared to 65-125 and 46-127, respectively) in all 5 journals. The most prominent reductions in S-A and S-P times were documented in the laryngology and otology/neurotology disciplines, respectively. Processing times of the included papers were significantly shorter in most of the selected ORL-HNS journals during the COVID-19 era compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. COVID-19-related papers were processed more rapidly than non-COVID-19-related papers. These findings testify to the possibility of markedly expediting S-P times and hopefully set a precedent for post-pandemic publishing schedules.

A Survey of US Science Journalists' Knowledge and Opinions of Open Access Research

The growth of open access (OA) has been reflected through the use of OA research by the news media, especially as the COVID-19 pandemic spurred more researchers to share preprints in open repositories. However, little is known about what journalists, particularly science journalists, actually know of and think about OA research as it pertains to their work. This study seeks to help answer these questions by surveying science journalists working in the United States. Results show a broad awareness of OA and related concepts. They also show that a majority of respondents are willing to use Gold OA and Hybrid OA scholarly articles as sources, although they expressed more hesitancy in using Green OA articles, especially when they are preprints. Respondents showed awareness of the term "predatory publishers," and a majority expressed concern about them.

JAE, 2022: Report of the Editor‐in‐Chief

Submissions to the Journal have stabilised since the Covid‐related surge in 2020, and continue their strong international pattern. Our response times continue to meet or exceed our targets, with a few regrettable exceptions, for which our sincere apologies. The JAE's citation impact factor increased again in 2021 to 4.16, a modest increase from the 2020 score. Our total 2‐year citations, however, show a worrying decline since last year. Our sincere thanks are due to our authors and our many reviewers for their contributions. Wiley continue to provide a strong publishing platform with our full archive, generating continuing growth in downloads.

Bestsellers: Popular fiction since 1900

This book charts the publishing industry and bestselling fiction from 1900, featuring a comprehensive list of all bestselling fiction titles in the UK. This third edition includes a new introduction which features additional information on current trends in reading including the rise of Black, Asian and LGBTQIA+ publishing;the continuing importance of certain genres and up to date trends in publishing, bookselling, library borrowing and literacy. There are sections on writing for children, on the importance of audiobooks and book clubs, self- published bestsellers as well as many new entries to the present day including bestselling authors such as David Walliams, Peter James, George R R Martin and far less well known authors whose books s sell in their thousands. This is the essential guide to best-selling books, authors, genres, publishing and bookselling since 1900, providing a unique insight into more than a century of entertainment, and opening a window into the reading habits and social life of the British from the death of Queen Victoria to the Coronavirus Pandemic. © Clive Bloom 2002, 2008, 2021. All rights reserved.

Enforcement Of Regulation for The Electronic Money in Indonesia in Order to Mitigate the Risk of Default Due to Insolvency: Acces la Success

The aims of this research is to know the protection of float funds in the regulation of the payment system in Indonesia and how to optimize the protection of float funds in order to mitigate insolvency risk. This research will examine the regulation relating to float funds, which has seen tremendous expansion in recent years. However, until today, the float fund does not yet have an optimum protection to mitigate risk of insolvency. Therefore the urgency of the protection of float fund through an update of regulation should be of concern, that is the necessity of insured protection towards float fund, as well as regulation on the use of float funding investment returns. This research is descriptive analytic and uses normative juridical approach by prioritizing the analysis of secondary data in the form of primary source of law that is laws and regulations;secondary source of law such as journals and other previous research;and tertiary source of law. Next, the received data is analyzed qualitatively and juridical. The conclusion of this research are by regulation, the protection of float fund has not been conducted optimally, a concrete effort is needed from the regulator to optimize the protection of float fund to mitigate the risk of failure of payment due to insolvency by insurance protection, and regulation on the use of float fun investment returns.

Scientific sinkhole: estimating the cost of peer review based on survey data with snowball sampling.

BACKGROUND: There are a variety of costs associated with publication of scientific findings. The purpose of this work was to estimate the cost of peer review in scientific publishing per reviewer, per year and for the entire scientific community. METHODS: Internet-based self-report, cross-sectional survey, live between June 28, 2021 and August 2, 2021 was used. Participants were recruited via snowball sampling. No restrictions were placed on geographic location or field of study. Respondents who were asked to act as a peer-reviewer for at least one manuscript submitted to a scientific journal in 2020 were eligible. The primary outcome measure was the cost of peer review per person, per year (calculated as wage-cost x number of initial reviews and number of re-reviews per year). The secondary outcome was the cost of peer review globally (calculated as the number of peer-reviewed papers in Scopus x median wage-cost of initial review and re-review). RESULTS: A total of 354 participants completed at least one question of the survey, and information necessary to calculate the cost of peer-review was available for 308 participants from 33 countries (44% from Canada). The cost of peer review was estimated at $US1,272 per person, per year ($US1,015 for initial review and $US256 for re-review), or US$1.1-1.7 billion for the scientific community per year. The global cost of peer-review was estimated at US$6 billion in 2020 when relying on the Dimensions database and taking into account reviewed-but-rejected manuscripts. CONCLUSIONS: Peer review represents an important financial piece of scientific publishing. Our results may not represent all countries or fields of study, but are consistent with previous estimates and provide additional context from peer reviewers themselves. Researchers and scientists have long provided peer review as a contribution to the scientific community. Recognizing the importance of peer-review, institutions should acknowledge these costs in job descriptions, performance measurement, promotion packages, and funding applications. Journals should develop methods to compensate reviewers for their time and improve transparency while maintaining the integrity of the peer-review process.

When the Big Deal Gets Smaller: Use of ScienceDirect after Cancellations

This study investigates how article downloads from ScienceDirect changed after Temple University Libraries downsized its all-inclusive Elsevier big deal bundle to a selective custom package. After the libraries lost current-year access to nearly half of Elsevier's active journals, the total downloads from Elsevier journals declined by 16.2 percent over three years. Combined use of still-subscribed and open access journals fell 10.6 percent in the same three years, suggesting that the drop in total use is due not only to the loss of journals but also to factors that would affect the remaining journals, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and a slight decrease in enrollment. Patrons may have substituted articles from still-subscribed and open access journals for those that were canceled, though the data are not conclusive. Reliance on open access appears to have increased.

High-Cited Papers in Global COVID-19 Vaccine Research

Aim and Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) virus pandemic is still ravaging the world with its ongoing resurgence and the continuous mutation, suggesting the need for continuous research on safe and effective novel vaccines. Presently several types of vaccines have been developed and emerged in the global market to control COVID-19 virus. Consequently, the knowledge and information on COVID-19 have been expanding at a high level. Researchers need to gain relevant knowledge regarding the different vaccines;however scattered information makes this process time-consuming and laborious. The present study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and trends in global COVID-19 vaccine high-cited literature using bibliometric and visualizations methods and offer some directions and suggestions for future research. Methodology: Studies published between December 2019 and 22 Nov 2022 on COVID-19 vaccines were retrieved from the Scopus database. From the 16026 studies retrieved, 406 were identified as high-cited papers (HCPs) having received 100 or more citations. From the 406 HCPs, information about publications outputs, countries, institutions, journals, keywords, and citation counts was identified. Data analysis and visualization were conducted using Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer and Bibliometrix R software. Result(s): The 406 global HCPs on COVID-19 vaccines research were identified in Scopus database since Dec 2019 till 30 Nov 2022 using a search strategy, which received 123614 citations, averaging 304.17 citations per publication (CPP). An external funding was received by 53.20% (216 publications), which were cited 76107 times (with an average of 352.35 CPP). The 7086 authors from 694 organizations affiliated to 76 countries and publishing in 121 journals were involved in global COVID-19 vaccine research. The most productive countries were USA (n=213), U.K (n=91), China (n=36) and Germany (n=35). The most impactful countries in terms of citations per paper (CPP) and relative citation index (RCI) were South Africa (794.68 and 2.61), Germany (507.11 and 1.67), U.K. (396.59 and 1.30) and Spain (367.5 and 1.121). The most productive organizations were University of Oxford, U.K., Imperial College London, U.K. (n=25 each), Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA and Tel Aviv University (n=19 each) and the most impactful organizations were University of Cambridge, U.K (783.4 and 2.57), Emory University, USA (780.1 and 2.56), John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA (702.67 and 2.31) and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. USA (676.41 and 2.22). The most productive authors were A.J. Pollard (n=16) and T. Lambe (n=14) (of University of Oxford), O. Tureci and P.R. Dormitzer (n=12 each) (of BioNTechSE, Germany) and the most impactful were D. Cooper (1239.22 and 4.07), K.J. Janseu (1228.11 and 4.03) (BioNTechSE, Germany, K.A. Swanson (987.0 and 3.24) (University of Oxford, U.K.) and P.R. Dormitzer (983 and 3.23) (BioNTechSE, Germany). The most productive journals were New England Journal of Medicine (n=53), The Lancet (n=28), Nature (n=22) and JAMA (N=17). The most impactful journals (as per citations per paper) were New England Journal of Medicine (613.15), Lancet (496.39), Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics (369.67) and Nature (360.64). Among population age groups, the major focus was on adults (51.48%) and Middle Aged (39.16%). Among publication types, the major focus was Clinical Studies (26.85%), Epidemiology (22.66%) and Genetics (21.92%). The most significant keywords by frequency of appearances were "Covid-19" (n=388), "Covid-19 Vaccines" (n=357), "Vaccination" (n=221), "Prevention and Control" (n=181) and "Vaccine Immunogenicity" (n=133), Conclusion(s): The HCPs in COVID-19 vaccine research was done mainly by the authors and institutions of high-income Countries (HIC) and was published in high-impact medical journals. Our research has identified the leading countries, institutions, journals, hotspots and development trend in the field that could provide the foundati n for further investigations. The bibliometric analysis will help the clinicians to rapidly identify the potential collaborative partners, identify significant studies, and research topics within their domains of COVID-19 vaccines.Copyright Author (s) 2023.

Year 2022 in review - anaesthesia.

By 2022, publishing has already returned to the standard. This means that the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic for anaesthesiologists is all but forgotten, and the safety of anesthesia is again the dominant issue. However, in addition to the traditional search for answers to whether we should prefer regional or general anesthesia and for which procedures and what is the best prevention of PONV, there is now another associated topic - postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction. Although both entities are crucial to the overall perioperative course, they still need more attention. This is even though, especially in elderly patients, they have already been shown to significantly affect perioperative morbidity and mortality. Moreover, to the surprise of many, recent data show that their incidence is not so much dependent on the type of anesthesia but on the quality of its administration. This text aims to briefly summarize some key publications in the field of anesthesiology and to highlight papers that should not escape attention.Copyright © 2022, Czech Medical Association J.E. Purkyne. All rights reserved.

Critical Orthodoxies and (Re) Imagining Scholarship for a Brave New World

Introduction to the special issue.

DISSERTATION NOTICES

The research methodology of the nature, purpose, and participants regarding criteria, ministry context, data collection, and analysis are considered. [...]the significant findings are discussed to ascertain the implication for ministry. The researcher used multiple linear regression analysis to address two research questions that examined whether the five dimensions of courageous followership behavior predict transformational and transactional leadership styles.