Capacity Building in Peer-review: A Student-Led Journal Report.

Peer-review optimizes the quality of research articles; however, new strategies need to be implemented to enhance peer-review capacity. This report comprises the peer-review process of a medical student-led journal editorial board, detailing its challenges and the students' role. The peer education approach conducted a capacity-building activity, developing guidelines, and practicing critical appraisal and constructive feedback in manners that classroom research training cannot. Understandings of an effective peer-review brought to discussion from standardization and blinding to ethical and scientific competencies essential in researchers. All parties, including students, should be allowed to extend their capabilities to enhance scholarly publishing.

Evaluation of the quality and subsequent performance of manuscripts rejected by Clinical Rheumatology: a research report.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality and performance of manuscripts previously rejected by a rheumatology-focused journal. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, audit-type, exploratory study of manuscripts submitted to Clinical Rheumatology (CLRH) and rejected by one associate editor in 2019. We used a 36-item quality assessment instrument (5-point ordinal scale, 1 being worst). Performance variables included whether a rejected manuscript was published in another PubMed-listed journal, impact factor of the publishing journal (Scimago), number of citations (Web of Science), and social media attention (Altmetrics). Exploratory variables included authors' past publications, use of reporting guidelines, and text structure. Exploratory variables were assessed using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: In total, 165 manuscripts were rejected. Reporting guidelines were used in only five (4%) manuscripts. The mean overall quality rating was 2.48 ± 0.73, with 54% of manuscripts rated 2; 40-80% were rated < 3 on crucial items. Over a 26-month follow-up, 79 (48%) rejected manuscripts were published in other journals, mostly with lower impact factors; 70% of these had at least one citation, compared with 90.5% for manuscripts published in CLRH. Altmetrics was significantly lower for manuscripts published elsewhere than for those published in CLRH. As for text structure, the methods and results sections were shorter and the discussion longer than suggested. The corresponding authors' past experience and text structure were not associated with quality or acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Research report quality is an area for improvement, mainly for items critical to explaining the research and findings. The use of reporting guidelines should be encouraged by journals. Key Points • The quality of research reports (in rejected manuscripts) is insufficient. • Guidelines for reporting are seldom used in rejected manuscripts. • A manuscript rejected by Clinical Rheumatology may subsequently be published in another journal with a lower impact factor and have fewer citations and less social media attention than accepted manuscripts.

Workshop 2019: Encuentro de Editores de Revistas Médico Científicas / Workshop 2019: Meeting of Medical Scientific Journal Editors

INTRODUCCIÓN. Los encuentros académicos públicos de expertos en divulgación cien-tífica que a través de órganos de registro y difusión oficial de revistas promueven el progreso de la ciencia, son un canal de comunicación entre la comunidad científica, tra-ducen el conocimiento de las disciplinas, educan y actualizan al profesional en sus roles de autor, lector, revisor, editor. Se fundamentan en políticas públicas y conducta ética. OBJETIVO. Describir las memorias del encuentro de editores, noviembre 2019, como insumo para las autoridades competentes que contribuya a establecer políticas y estrate-gias que permitan elevar la calidad científica, así como el proceso editorial de las revistas científicas en salud del Ecuador. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS. Estudio observacional, descriptivo, con población y muestra conocida, obtención de la información en el sistema de gestión documental del Hospital de Especialidades Carlos Andrade Marín, noviembre 2019. RESULTADOS. Estadística descriptiva del perfil de los asistentes, descripción de problemas, soluciones y aportes. CONCLUSIÓN. Obtención de insumos del encuentro de editores en las "Buenas Prácticas del Proceso Editorial". Organización, estructura, norma, rol del equipo editorial, revisión de pares y Plan Anual de Capacitación Continua.

INTRODUCTION. Public academic meetings of experts in scientific dissemination that through the registration and official dissemination bodies of journals promote the progress of science, are a channel of communication between the scientific community, transla-te knowledge of the disciplines, educate and update the professional in their roles as author, reader, reviewer, editor. They are based on public policies and ethical conduct. OBJECTIVE. Describe the memories of the meeting of editors, November 2019, as an input for the competent authorities that contributes to establishing policies and strategies that allow raising scientific quality, as well as the editorial process of scientific journals in health in Ecuador. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Descriptive study, with a population and a known sample, obtaining the information in the document management system of the Carlos Andrade Marin Specialties Hospital, November 2019. RESULTS. Descriptive statistics of the assistants profile, description of problems, solutions and contributions. CONCLUSION. Obtaining inputs from the meeting of editors in the "Good Practices of the Editorial Process". Organization, structure, norm, role of the editorial team, peer review and Annual Continuous Training Plan.

Is my paper relevant for an international audience?

This is the first question one should consider before submitting a paper to an international journal. The answer is simple: If researchers or practitioners from another country can learn something from your paper that can influence a practice or a research they are involved in, then your paper is relevant for an international audience. There are many elements that can influence in this cross-border transferability. One could think that having a big "n", or performing complex statistical calculations, or using complicated study designs makes the paper more attractive to colleagues from other countries. These elements can help, but they are not sufficient. On the other hand, one could think that a study performed in a small hospital in a given country will never be of interest for these foreign colleagues. That is not necessarily correct. Let's burst some myths.

How many manuscripts should I peer review per year?

Peer review provides the foundation for the scholarly publishing system. The conventional peer review system consists of using authors of articles as reviewers for other colleagues' manuscripts in a collaborative-basis system. However, authors complain about a theoretical overwhelming number of invitations to peer review. It seems that authors feel that they are invited to review many more manuscripts than they should when taking into account their participation in the scholarly publishing system. The high number of scientific journals and the existence of predatory journals were reported as potential causes of this excessive number of reviews required. In this editorial, we demonstrate that the number of reviewers required to publish a given number of articles depends exclusively on the journals' rejection rate and the number of reviewers intended per manuscript. Several initiatives to overcome the peer review crises are suggested.

Acesso aberto a artigos, dados e materiais de pesquisa na RBMFC / Open access to articles, data and research materials on RBMFC / Acceso abierto a artículos, datos y materiales de investigación en RBMFC

Acesso aberto aos artigos, dados e materiais de pesquisa são alguns elementos-chave da ciência aberta, um movimento plural que visa a transformar a criação e a comunicação do conhecimento científico. Graças à publicação de artigos em acesso aberto e à adoção de boas práticas editoriais, a RBMFC tem seus artigos indexados na LILACS e, mais recentemente, no DOAJ. A RBMFC também adota as diretrizes Transparency and Openness Promotion do Center for Open Science, e disponibiliza suas referências na CrossRef em domínio público, graças ao que a revista foi incluída no índice de citações OpenCitations. Com isso, a RBMFC espera tornar mais acessível, democrática e eficiente a pesquisa em medicina de família e comunidade e atenção primária à saúde.

Open access to research articles, data and materials are some key elements of open science, a plural movement that aims to transform the creation and communication of scientific knowledge. Thanks to the publication of articles in open access and the adoption of good editorial practices, RBMFC has its articles indexed in LILACS and, more recently, in DOAJ. RBMFC also adopts the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines from the Center for Open Science, and makes its references in CrossRef available in the public domain, thanks to which the journal was included in the OpenCitations citation index. With this, RBMFC hopes to make research in family and community medicine and primary health care more accessible, democratic and efficient

El acceso abierto a artículos, datos y materiales de investigación son algunos de los elementos clave de la ciencia abierta, un movimiento plural que tiene como objetivo transformar la creación y comunicación del conocimiento científico. Gracias a la publicación de artículos en acceso abierto y la adopción de buenas prácticas editoriales, RBMFC tiene sus artículos indexados en LILACS y, más recientemente, en DOAJ. RBMFC también adopta las directrices Transparency and Openness Promotion del Center for Open Science, y hace que sus referencias en CrossRef estén disponibles en el dominio público, gracias a lo cual la revista fue incluida en el índice de citas de OpenCitations. Con esto, RBMFC espera que la investigación en medicina familiar y comunitaria y atención primaria de salud sea más accesible, democrática y eficiente.

[The importance of national medical journals in a global world]. / La importancia de las revistas médicas nacionales en un mundo global.

National medical journals are important because they focus on local clinical problems, peer communication, and fostering critical reading among healthcare workers. The actors involved in the development of the journals must fulfill their purposes to improve the quality of the publications of the national journals and contribute to improve the quality of care.

Las revistas médicas nacionales son importantes porque se enfocan en los problemas clínicos locales, la comunicación entre pares y el fomento de la lectura crítica entre los trabajadores de la salud. Los actores involucrados en el desarrollo de las revistas deben cumplir con sus propósitos para mejorar la calidad de las publicaciones de las revistas nacionales y contribuir con la mejoría de la calidad de la atención.

Gestión de revisores en la revista Archivo Médico de Camagüey / Management of reviewers in the Archivo Médico de Camagüey journal

RESUMEN Fundamento: luego de la aceptación preliminar del artículo desde el punto de vista metodológico y de la redacción del texto, se procede a su revisión por expertos, proceso que es fundamental para refrendar su validez científica. Objetivo: describir la experiencia y resultados de la revista Archivo Médico de Camagüey en la gestión de incorporación de revisores. Métodos: se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos SciELO Cuba, SciELO Regional, se utilizaron los descriptores: árbitro, revisión por pares, criterios de selección, peer review, revisión de la investigación por pares. Resultados: cada vez es mayor el número de revisores incorporados, con representación de las provincias del país y de otros países, la mayor parte de las provincias están representadas y después de Cuba le siguen Chile y Perú. Conclusiones: la gestión de árbitros es un proceso complejo y minucioso que se planifica en tres momentos: identificación, verificación y negociación. La revista muestra un trabajo ascendente en la incorporación de árbitros, se incrementa la incorporación de árbitros de otros países de la región.

ABSTRACT Background: after the preliminary acceptance of the article from the methodological point of view, and the writing of the text, it is revised by experts, a process that is fundamental to validate its scientific validity. Objective: to describe the experience and results of the journal Archivo Médico de Camagüey in the management of reviewers´ incorporation. Methods: a search was made in the SciELO Cuba, SciELO Regional databases, the used descriptors were referee, peer review, selection criteria. Results: the number of incorporated reviewers is increasing, with representation of the provinces of the country and from other countries, most of the provinces are represented and after Cuba with (86,0 %) they are followed by Chile (2,7 %) and Peru (2,2 %). Conclusions: the management of reviewers is a complex and meticulous process, which is planned in three moments: identification, verification and negotiation. The magazine shows an ascending work in the incorporation of reviewers, the incorporation of referees from other countries of the region is increased.

Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers.

The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre-publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer?

WASP - Write a Scientific Paper course: why and how.

The ability to write up research in the form of a paper is a crucial requisite for academics. The skills required are manifold and are acquired piecemeal during an individual's training. Matters would be facilitated by a short and intensive course that would cover all of these facets. Such a course would ideally be delivered by experienced writers and editors. It is for this very reason that WASP (Write a Scientific Paper) was created. WASP was held outside of Malta for the first time, in London. This paper describes the preparations required in order to plan and execute a course of this or similar nature.

Metrics in academic profiles: a new addictive game for researchers? / Métricas en perfiles académicos: ¿un nuevo juego adictivo para los investigadores?

This study aims to promote reflection and bring attention to the potential adverse effects of academic social networks on science. These academic social networks, where authors can display their publications, have become new scientific communication channels, accelerating the dissemination of research results, facilitating data sharing, and strongly promoting scientific collaboration, all at no cost to the user.One of the features that make them extremely attractive to researchers is the possibility to browse through a wide variety of bibliometric indicators. Going beyond publication and citation counts, they also measure usage, participation in the platform, social connectivity, and scientific, academic and professional impact. Using these indicators they effectively create a digital image of researchers and their reputations.However, although academic social platforms are useful applications that can help improve scientific communication, they also hide a less positive side: they are highly addictive tools that might be abused. By gamifying scientific impact using techniques originally developed for videogames, these platforms may get users hooked on them, like addicted academics, transforming what should only be a means into an end in itself.

OBJETIVO: Pretende este trabajo provocar la reflexión y alertar de los posibles peligros para la ciencia que encierran las nuevas redes sociales académicas que tanto éxito están teniendo en nuestros días. Las redes sociales académicas donde los autores pueden mostrar sus publicaciones se han convertido en nuevos canales de comunicación científica, pues agilizan la diseminación de los resultados de investigación, facilitan la compartición de datos y fomentan la colaboración científica de forma extensa sin coste alguno. Una de las novedades principales de estas plataformas, que es lo que las hace enormemente atractivas para los investigadores, consiste en la disponibilidad de una amplia batería de indicadores bibliométricos que van más allá del conteo de publicaciones y citas pues permiten medir el uso, la participación, la conectividad social y el impacto científico, académico y profesional. Sobre estos indicadores se está construyendo la propia imagen y reputación digital de los científicos. Pues bien, todos estos beneficios de las redes sociales académicas en la mejora de la comunicación científica esconden un lado no tan positivo para la ciencia. Se trata de herramientas muy peligrosas, que pueden convertirse en auténticas adicciones. Mediante la gamificación del impacto científico a través de persuasivas técnicas procedentes de los videojuegos, estas plataformas pueden hacer que los usuarios queden enganchados, como académicos adictos, convirtiendo lo que es un medio en un fin en sí mismo.

Necesidad de fortalecer el arbitraje de los informes de investigación enviados a la Gaceta Médica Espirituana / The need for strengthening the arbitration of the reports of investigation sent to the Medical Gazette of Sancti Spiritus

La Estadística es ampliamente utilizada por los profesionales de las ciencias médicas no solo como recurso auxiliar en el enfrentamiento y solución a problemas de su profesión que contribuye a valorar y tomar decisiones sobre los diseños de investigación, sino también para mantener actualizados sus conocimientos mediante la lectura crítica de las evidencias provenientes de la investigación científica, así como para comunicarse con otros profesionales a propósito del análisis de sus datos.

Statistics is widely used by the professionals of the Medical Sciences, not only as a an auxiliary tool but also to face and give solution to the problems of their field which contribute to the assessment and decision taken about designs of investigation, moreover to keep updated by critical reading of evidences coming from the scientific investigation, besides to communicate with other professionals with the purpose of analyzing their data.

Normalizing Rejection.

Getting turned down for grant funding or having a manuscript rejected is an uncomfortable but not unusual occurrence during the course of a nurse researcher's professional life. Rejection can evoke an emotional response akin to the grieving process that can slow or even undermine productivity. Only by "normalizing" rejection, that is, by accepting it as an integral part of the scientific process, can researchers more quickly overcome negative emotions and instead use rejection to refine and advance their scientific programs. This article provides practical advice for coming to emotional terms with rejection and delineates methods for working constructively to address reviewer comments.

Laboratory animal research published in plastic surgery journals in 2014 has extensive waste: A systematic review.

UNLABELLED: Laboratory animal research must be designed in a manner that minimizes bias if it is to yield valid and reproducible results. In 2009, a survey that examined 271 animal studies found that 87% did not use randomization and 86% did not use blinding. This has been called "research waste" because it wasted time and resources. This systematic review measured the quantity of research waste in plastic surgery journals in 2014. METHOD: The PRISMA-P protocol was used. SCOPUS and PubMed searches were done for all animal studies published in 2014 in Aesthetic Plast Surg, Aesthet Surg J, Ann Plast Surg, JPRAS, J Plast Surg Hand Surg and Plast Reconstr Surg. These were supplemented by manual searches of the 2014 issues not indexed. Articles were analyzed for descriptions of randomization, randomization methodology, allocation concealment, and blinding of the primary outcome assessment. Corresponding authors who mentioned randomization without elaborating were emailed for details. RESULTS: 112 of 154 articles met the inclusion criteria. Only 24/112 (21.4%) had blinding of the primary outcome measure, 28/110 (25.5%) of articles that required randomization mentioned it. While 12/28 articles clearly described randomizing the intervention, only 4/28 described the method of randomization, and 2/28 mentioned allocation concealment. Only two authors responded and described the randomization methodology. CONCLUSION: The quality of plastic surgery laboratory animal research published in 2014 was poor. Use of the National Centre for the Replacement Refinement & Reduction of Animals in Research's "Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments" (ARRIVE) Guidelines by authors, and enforcement of them by editors and reviewers could improve research quality and reduce waste.

Analysis of subsequent publication of scientific orally presented abstracts of the French National Congress of Radiology. Part II: Focus on the French abstracts.

AIM: To evaluate the publication rate of scientific abstracts that were presented orally at the 2008, 2009, and 2010 annual meetings of the French Society of Radiology by French radiologists, and to perform a French regional analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Orally presented abstracts were identified by examining online abstract books of the 2008, 2009, and 2010 annual meetings of the French Society of Radiology, and cross-checked by reviewing the paper version of abstracts for the same period. Only abstracts from French teams were selected. The administrative region of submission was noted for each abstract and for each region the total population, the number of active radiologists, the number of active members of the French Society of Radiology and the number of academic radiologists were noted. Imaging subspecialties were also noted. RESULTS: 625 abstracts were identified resulting in 268 publications (publication rate: 43%). The median number of presentations and publications per region was 18 (range: 1-255) and 7 (range: 0-101), respectively. The ratio per million inhabitants was 7.5 and 3 respectively. The median number of presentations and publications per 100 active radiologists (respectively members of the FSR) was 7 and 3 (respectively 10 and 4). The median number of presentations and publications per academic radiologist were 2.6, and 1.2, respectively. The regional variations for each indicator were high (40-180%). Three subspecialties had a publication rate of more than 50%: thoracic imaging (58%), abdominal imaging (52%), and genitourinary imaging (51%). CONCLUSION: The publication rate of orally presented French scientific abstracts was high, with important variations according to the regions of origin and imaging subspecialties.

Reporting on interventions: issues and guidelines for rehabilitation researchers.

Observers commonly note the poor reporting of research, including rehabilitation research. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist (supplemented by the CONSORT extension for nonpharmacologic interventions) has been published for improving the reporting of intervention research. However, the items on these checklists are considered to be inadequate to guide authors as to which information to include when reporting on the intervention(s) studied, and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication, Journal Article Reporting Standards, and the checklist of the Western Journal of Nursing Research are recommended to rehabilitation researchers. The Rehabilitation Treatment Taxonomy framework is recommended as a conceptual scheme to assist authors in thinking through the linkages between intervention ingredients, targets of treatment, and the mechanisms of action linking these 2 areas. Recommendations are made for prospective authors and journal editors who desire to see improved reporting of rehabilitation interventions.