Publication of pediatric theses defended at the Tunis Faculty of Medicine: A 15-year study.

INTRODUCTION: The valorisation of thesis through its publication is necessary to enhance its visibility. Few data exist concerning the characteristics of theses defended at the Tunis faculty of medicine. AIM: Examine the publication rate of pediatric theses and identify factors associated with an increased publication rate. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive bibliometric study of pediatric theses defended at the Faculty of Medicine of Tunis over 15 years, from 2006 to 2020. Theses were retrieved from the catalog of the faculty library. Publications had been searched in databases "Pub Med ", and "Google Scholar" until December2021. RESULTS: The study involved 235 pediatric theses. Sixty-eight theses were published, representing 29% of the total. The main topics of published theses were neonatology (16%) and hematology (15%). The language of publication was French and English in 55% and 45% of cases, respectively. All publications in Q1 and Q2 journals were written in English. The only independent factor predicting publication of theses was the very honourable mention with congratulations of the jury and proposal for the thesis prize (p=0,007). CONCLUSION: Additional assessments will be necessary to identify the obstacles to the publication of theses.

Exploring the impact of cardiologists expertise on publication metrics.

BACKGROUND: In the field of academic cardiology, the assessment of an author's scholarly impact and professional progression heavily relies on publications and citations. This study investigates whether specific cardiology expertise correlates with accelerated professional growth. METHODS: Using data from the 2023 European Society of Cardiology congress, 948 faculty attendees with an h-index of 30 or higher were analyzed. Expertises were categorized into six groups, and their association with publications and citations peaks was explored. RESULTS: Interventional cardiologists exhibited the highest annual publication peak, followed by imaging and electrophysiology experts. However, no significant differences were observed in citation peaks among expertise groups. While imaging experts initially appeared to reach citation peaks faster, this effect diminished after statistical adjustments. Additionally, holding multiple expertise areas prolonged the time to reach publication and citation peaks by approximately six years. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the influence of expertise in interventional cardiology on publication peaks but suggests that citation peaks and career progression velocity remain unaffected by expertise type. Furthermore, it highlights that holding multiple areas of expertise slowers the attainment of career peak for scholarly authors.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Scientific Publications on Eating Disorder Prevention in the Past Three Decades.

BACKGROUND: Eating disorders (EDs) present a growing concern due to their widespread occurrence and chronic course, the low access to evidence-based treatment, and the significant burden they place on the patients and society. This picture justifies intensive focus on the prevention of EDs. The current study provides the first bibliometric analysis of research on the prevention of EDs, focusing on trends and contributions, to prompt further prevention research. METHODS: We conducted a bibliometric analysis of publications on the prevention of EDs using the Web of Science database, from 1993 to 2023. Focusing on universal and selective prevention strategies, our study involved a rigorous selection process, narrowing down from 10,546 to 383 relevant papers through manual screening. The analysis utilized the "bibliometrix" R package (version 4.2.2) and Python (version 3.9.6) for data processing, with VOSviewer employed for mapping collaboration networks. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed a consistent annual growth rate of 10.85% in ED prevention research publications, with significant contributions from the "International Journal of Eating Disorders" and some notable authors. The United States emerged as the dominant contributor. The analysis also highlighted key trends, including a surge in publications between 2010 and 2017, and the role of major institutions in advancing research in this field. DISCUSSION: The increasing rate of publications on the prevention of EDs is encouraging. However, the actual number of studies on the prevention of EDs are limited, and the majority of this work is performed by a few research groups. Given the high concentration of publications within a few countries and research groups, increased funding, facilitation of prevention research on a wider scale, and engagement of more researchers and further collaboration are called for.

Analysis of justification for author order and gender bias in author order among those contributing equally.

The practice of designating two or more authors as equal contributors (ECs) on a scientific publication is increasingly common as a form of sharing credit. However, EC authors are often unclearly attributed on curriculum vitae (CVs) or citation engines, and it is unclear how research teams determine author order within an EC listing. In response to studies showing that male authors were more likely to be placed first in an EC listing, the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) required that authors explain the reasons for author order beginning in 2020. In this study, we analyze data from over 2,500 ASM publications to see how this policy affected gender bias and how research teams are making decisions on author order. Data on publications from 2018 to 2021 show that gender bias was largely nonsignificant both before and after authors were asked by ASM to provide an EC statement. The most likely reasons for EC order included alphabetical order, seniority, and chance, although there were differences for publications from different geographic regions. However, many research teams used unique methods in order selection, highlighting the importance of EC statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees. IMPORTANCE: First-author publications are important for early career scientists to secure funding and educational opportunities. However, an analysis published in eLife in 2019 noted that female authors are more likely to be placed second even when both authors report they have contributed equally. American Society for Microbiology announced in response that they would require submissions to include a written justification of author order. In this paper, we analyze the resultant data and show that laboratories are most likely to use some combination of alphabetical order, seniority, and chance to determine author order. However, the prevalence of these methods varies based on the research team's geographic location. These findings highlight the importance of equal contributor statements to provide clarity for readers, funding agencies, and tenure committees. Furthermore, this work is critically important for understanding how these decisions are made and provides a glimpse of the sociology of science.

Big data research in nursing: A bibliometric exploration of themes and publications.

AIMS: To comprehend the current research hotspots and emerging trends in big data research within the global nursing domain. DESIGN: Bibliometric analysis. METHODS: The quality articles for analysis indexed by the science core collection were obtained from the Web of Science database as of February 10, 2023.The descriptive, visual analysis and text mining were realized by CiteSpace and VOSviewer. RESULTS: The research on big data in the nursing field has experienced steady growth over the past decade. A total of 45 core authors and 17 core journals around the world have contributed to this field. The author's keyword analysis has revealed five distinct clusters of research focus. These encompass machine/deep learning and artificial intelligence, natural language processing, big data analytics and data science, IoT and cloud computing, and the development of prediction models through data mining. Furthermore, a comparative examination was conducted with data spanning from 1980 to 2016, and an extended analysis was performed covering the years from 1980 to 2019. This bibliometric mapping comparison allowed for the identification of prevailing research trends and the pinpointing of potential future research hotspots within the field. CONCLUSIONS: The fusion of data mining and nursing research has steadily advanced and become more refined over time. Technologically, it has expanded from initial natural language processing to encompass machine learning, deep learning, artificial intelligence, and data mining approach that amalgamates multiple technologies. Professionally, it has progressed from addressing patient safety and pressure ulcers to encompassing chronic diseases, critical care, emergency response, community and nursing home settings, and specific diseases (Cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, stroke, etc.). The convergence of IoT, cloud computing, fog computing, and big data processing has opened new avenues for research in geriatric nursing management and community care. However, a global imbalance exists in utilizing big data in nursing research, emphasizing the need to enhance data science literacy among clinical staff worldwide to advance this field. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study focused on the thematic trends and evolution of research on the big data in nursing research. Moreover, this study may contribute to the understanding of researchers, journals, and countries around the world and generate the possible collaborations of them to promote the development of big data in nursing science.

Does lower use of academic affiliation by university faculty in top U.S. newspapers contribute to misinformation about abortion?

BACKGROUND: University faculty are considered trusted sources of information to disseminate accurate information to the public that abortion is a common, safe and necessary medical health care service. However, misinformation persists about abortion's alleged dangers, commonality, and medical necessity. METHODS: Systematic review of popular media articles related to abortion, gun control (an equally controversial topic), and cigarette use (a more neutral topic) published in top U.S. newspapers between January 2015 and July 2020 using bivariate analysis and logistic regression to compare disclosure of university affiliation among experts in each topic area. RESULTS: We included 41 abortion, 102 gun control, and 130 smoking articles, which consisted of 304 distinct media mentions of university-affiliated faculty. Articles with smoking and gun control faculty experts had statistically more affiliations mentioned (90%, n = 195 and 88%, n = 159, respectively) than abortion faculty experts (77%, n = 54) (p = 0.02). The probability of faculty disclosing university affiliation was similar between smoking and gun control (p = 0.73), but between smoking and abortion was significantly less (Ave Marginal Effects - 0.13, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Fewer faculty members disclose their university affiliation in top U.S. newspapers when discussing abortion. Lack of academic disclosure may paradoxically make these faculty appear less 'legitimate.' This leads to misinformation, branding abortion as a 'choice,' suggesting it is an unessential medical service. With the recent U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, and subsequent banning of abortion in many U.S. states, faculty will probably be even less likely to disclose their university affiliation in the media than in the past.

Producción científica de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de La Habana en revistas estudiantiles cubanas / The scientific production of the University of Medical Sciences of Havana published in student scientific journals

Introducción: Se desconocen las características de la ciencia generada por la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de La Habana, publicada en revistas científicas estudiantiles nacionales. Los estudios métricos constituyen herramientas idóneas para abordar problemáticas de esta naturaleza. Objetivo: Caracterizar la producción científica de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de La Habana en revistas estudiantiles cubanas. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio métrico, descriptivo y transversal en 121 artículos publicados en 12 revistas entre 2017 y 2021. Resultados: Los artículos alcanzaron 149 citas y 65,8 citas corregidas. Hubo un alto índice de Subramanyan (0,76) y un bajo índice de colaboración entre facultades (0,16). Se registraron 207 autores; 2 de ellos fueron líderes. Predominaron los artículos originales (38,8 por ciento). HolCien ostentó el mayor índice de Price (0,87), mientras que 16 de abril y Universidad Médica Pinareña lideraron, respectivamente, en cuanto a número de citas (71) y de citas corregidas (32,5). La Facultad Manuel Fajardo resultó la más productiva (n = 29); y la Facultad Calixto García, la más citada (54 citas). En 2020 se alcanzó el mayor número de publicaciones (n = 51) y de citas (88), probablemente como consecuencia de la COVID-19, que constituyó el principal foco temático emergente de investigación. Conclusiones: La producción se caracterizó por ser baja, mostrar una tendencia al ascenso cuantitativo, ostentar altos índices de coautoría y originalidad científica, y contar con autores líderes. Fue débil en cuanto a la colaboración entre facultades, la publicación en inglés y la actualización de las referencias bibliográficas (AU)

Introduction: The characteristics of the science produced by the University of Medical Sciences of Havana, published in national student scientific journals, are unknown. Metric studies are ideal tools for approaching problem situations of this nature. Objective: To characterize the scientific production of the University of Medical Sciences of Havana published in Cuban student journals. Methods: A metric, descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out with 121 articles published in twelve journals between 2017 and 2021. Results: The articles reached 149 citations and 65.8 corrected citations. There was a high Subramanyan index (0.76) and a low index of collaboration between schools (0.16). There were 207 reported authors; two of them were leaders. Original articles predominated (38.8 percent). HolCien had the highest Price index (0.87), while the journals 16 de Abril and Universidad Médica Pinareña led, respectively, in number of citations (71) and corrected citations (32.5). The Manuel Fajardo Medical School was the most productive (n=29), while the Calixto García Medical School was the most cited (54 citations). In 2020, the highest number of publications (n=51) and citations (88) was reached, probably as a consequence of COVID-19, which became the main emerging thematic focus of research. Conclusions: The production was characterized by being low, showing a quantitative upward trend, as well as high rates of coauthorship and scientific originality, and by having leading authors. It was weak in terms of collaboration between schools, publication in English and updating of bibliographic references(AU)

[The year 2022 placed in perspective by hospital internists]. / Année 2022 mise en perspective par les internistes hospitaliers.

According to PubMed statistics when writing this review, the year 2022 is expected to mark the first dip in the number of articles published in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. This review, without any mention to Sars-CoV-2, highlight this transition and addresses many topics in internal medicine: gastroenterology, cardiology, endocrinology, respiratory medicine, infectious diseases and venous access. Each year, the chief residents of the internal medicine ward in Lausanne university hospital (CHUV) in Switzerland meet up to share their readings: here is a selection of ten articles that have caught our attention, summarized and commented for you, which should change our daily practice.

D'après les statistiques PubMed au moment de la rédaction de cette revue, l'année 2022 devrait marquer le premier infléchissement du nombre d'articles publiés en relation avec la pandémie de Covid-19. Cette revue d'articles, sans écho au Sars-CoV-2, souligne cette transition et aborde de nombreux sujets de la médecine interne : gastroentérologie, cardiologie, endocrinologie, pneumologie, infectiologie et accès veineux. Chaque année, les cheffes et chefs de clinique du Service de médecine interne du CHUV se réunissent pour partager leurs lectures : voici une sélection de dix articles ayant retenu notre attention, revus et commentés pour vous, et qui devraient faire évoluer notre pratique quotidienne.

Publication requirement for faculty promotion in medical institutions in India: 'Mind the gap'.

Background . We assessed the balance between the number of publications required by medical teachers and the publication space available in the Indian medical journals. Methods . The Medical Council of India (MCI) website, its guidelines and documents were searched and we extracted data on the number of medical colleges, undergraduate and postgraduate seats and faculty requirement. The required number of assistant professors and associate professors was calculated. The publication requirements were estimated according to MCI's February 2020 guidelines. A publication which satisfied the above guidelines for promotion was counted as 'eligible publication'. Indian medical journals indexed in any of the MCI-permitted databases were identified, and the number of eligible articles in them in 2019 was counted. Results . India has a total of 79 798 MBBS seats, 33 025 postgraduate seats and 4231 superspecialty seats in MCI-certified medical institutions and to teach them 35 285 assistant professors and 23 116 associate professors are required. Assuming that each publication could serve a maximum of 3 teachers, we will need approximately 50 696 eligible publications in the next 7 years. A search of applicable databases, identified 162 unique Indian medical journals of which 79 were indexed in PubMed/PubMed Central. Among the remaining 63 were indexed in DOAJ, 14 in EMBASE, 3 in Scopus and 3 were indexed only in WOSSCIE. These journals cumulatively published a total of 8508 eligible publications in 2019. Conclusion . The publication space in Indian medical journals is limited, thus there is a need to have a national medical repository such as MedRxiv to prevent publication in predatory journals.

Gender-diverse teams produce more novel and higher-impact scientific ideas.

Science's changing demographics raise new questions about research team diversity and research outcomes. We study mixed-gender research teams, examining 6.6 million papers published across the medical sciences since 2000 and establishing several core findings. First, the fraction of publications by mixed-gender teams has grown rapidly, yet mixed-gender teams continue to be underrepresented compared to the expectations of a null model. Second, despite their underrepresentation, the publications of mixed-gender teams are substantially more novel and impactful than the publications of same-gender teams of equivalent size. Third, the greater the gender balance on a team, the better the team scores on these performance measures. Fourth, these patterns generalize across medical subfields. Finally, the novelty and impact advantages seen with mixed-gender teams persist when considering numerous controls and potential related features, including fixed effects for the individual researchers, team structures, and network positioning, suggesting that a team's gender balance is an underrecognized yet powerful correlate of novel and impactful scientific discoveries.

Comparison of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 papers.

OBJECTIVE: The need to generate evidence related to COVID-19, the acceleration of publication and peer-review process and the competition between journals may have influenced the quality of COVID-19 papers. Our objective was to compare the characteristics of COVID-19 papers against those of non-COVID-19 papers and identify the variables in which they differ. METHOD: We conducted a journal-matched case-control study. Cases were COVID-19 papers and controls were non-COVID-19 papers published between March 2020 and January 2021. Journals belonging to five different Journal Citations Reports categories were selected. Within each selected journal, a COVID-19 paper (where there was one) and another non-COVID-19 paper were selected. Conditional logistic regression models were fitted. RESULTS: We included 81 COVID-19 and 143 non-COVID-19 papers. Descriptive observational studies and analytical observational studies had, respectively, a 55-fold (odds ratio [OR]: 55.12; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 7.41-409.84) and 19-fold (OR: 19.28; 95%CI: 3.09-120.31) higher likelihood of being COVID-19 papers, respectively, and also a higher probability of having a smaller sample size (OR: 7.15; 95%CI: 2.33-21.94). COVID-19 papers had a higher probability of being cited since their publication (OR: 4.97; 95%CI: 1.63-15.10). CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of COVID-19 papers differed from those of non-COVID-19 papers published in the first months of the pandemic. In order to ensure the publication of good scientific evidence the quality of COVID-19-papers should be preserved.

Mind the gender gap: COVID-19 lockdown effects on gender differences in preprint submissions.

The gender gap is a well-known problem in academia and, despite its gradual narrowing, recent estimations indicate that it will persist for decades. Short-term descriptive studies suggest that this gap may have actually worsened during the months of confinement following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. In this work, we evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on female and male academics' research productivity using preprint drop-off data. We examine a total of 307,902 unique research articles deposited in 5 major preprint repositories during the period between January and May each year from 2017 to 2020. We find that the proportion of female authors in online repositories steadily increased over time; however, the trend reversed during the confinement and gender parity worsened in two respects. First, the proportion of male authors in preprints increased significantly during lockdown. Second, the proportion of male authors in COVID-19-related articles was significantly higher than that of women. Overall, our results imply that the gender gap in academia suffered an approximately 1-year setback during the strict lockdown months of 2020, and COVID-related research areas suffered an additional 1.5-year setback.

Tracking changes between preprint posting and journal publication during a pandemic.

Amid the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, preprints in the biomedical sciences are being posted and accessed at unprecedented rates, drawing widespread attention from the general public, press, and policymakers for the first time. This phenomenon has sharpened long-standing questions about the reliability of information shared prior to journal peer review. Does the information shared in preprints typically withstand the scrutiny of peer review, or are conclusions likely to change in the version of record? We assessed preprints from bioRxiv and medRxiv that had been posted and subsequently published in a journal through April 30, 2020, representing the initial phase of the pandemic response. We utilised a combination of automatic and manual annotations to quantify how an article changed between the preprinted and published version. We found that the total number of figure panels and tables changed little between preprint and published articles. Moreover, the conclusions of 7.2% of non-COVID-19-related and 17.2% of COVID-19-related abstracts undergo a discrete change by the time of publication, but the majority of these changes do not qualitatively change the conclusions of the paper.

Systematic comparison of published host gene expression signatures for bacterial/viral discrimination.

BACKGROUND: Measuring host gene expression is a promising diagnostic strategy to discriminate bacterial and viral infections. Multiple signatures of varying size, complexity, and target populations have been described. However, there is little information to indicate how the performance of various published signatures compare to one another. METHODS: This systematic comparison of host gene expression signatures evaluated the performance of 28 signatures, validating them in 4589 subjects from 51 publicly available datasets. Thirteen COVID-specific datasets with 1416 subjects were included in a separate analysis. Individual signature performance was evaluated using the area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUC) value. Overall signature performance was evaluated using median AUCs and accuracies. RESULTS: Signature performance varied widely, with median AUCs ranging from 0.55 to 0.96 for bacterial classification and 0.69-0.97 for viral classification. Signature size varied (1-398 genes), with smaller signatures generally performing more poorly (P < 0.04). Viral infection was easier to diagnose than bacterial infection (84% vs. 79% overall accuracy, respectively; P < .001). Host gene expression classifiers performed more poorly in some pediatric populations (3 months-1 year and 2-11 years) compared to the adult population for both bacterial infection (73% and 70% vs. 82%, respectively; P < .001) and viral infection (80% and 79% vs. 88%, respectively; P < .001). We did not observe classification differences based on illness severity as defined by ICU admission for bacterial or viral infections. The median AUC across all signatures for COVID-19 classification was 0.80 compared to 0.83 for viral classification in the same datasets. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic comparison of 28 host gene expression signatures, we observed differences based on a signature's size and characteristics of the validation population, including age and infection type. However, populations used for signature discovery did not impact performance, underscoring the redundancy among many of these signatures. Furthermore, differential performance in specific populations may only be observable through this type of large-scale validation.

All types of Research and Publication (including in Diabetes) have shown a healthy rising trend from India in the last decade.

India has moved up its publications ranking globally to fourth, and to second amongst Asiatic countries in 2020, in all subject areas. In Diabetes journals the Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research and Reviews is the fastest growing journal with the highest Cite Scoree, currently.

Analysis of 567,758 randomized controlled trials published over 30 years reveals trends in phrases used to discuss results that do not reach statistical significance.

The power of language to modify the reader's perception of interpreting biomedical results cannot be underestimated. Misreporting and misinterpretation are pressing problems in randomized controlled trials (RCT) output. This may be partially related to the statistical significance paradigm used in clinical trials centered around a P value below 0.05 cutoff. Strict use of this P value may lead to strategies of clinical researchers to describe their clinical results with P values approaching but not reaching the threshold to be "almost significant." The question is how phrases expressing nonsignificant results have been reported in RCTs over the past 30 years. To this end, we conducted a quantitative analysis of English full texts containing 567,758 RCTs recorded in PubMed between 1990 and 2020 (81.5% of all published RCTs in PubMed). We determined the exact presence of 505 predefined phrases denoting results that approach but do not cross the line of formal statistical significance (P < 0.05). We modeled temporal trends in phrase data with Bayesian linear regression. Evidence for temporal change was obtained through Bayes factor (BF) analysis. In a randomly sampled subset, the associated P values were manually extracted. We identified 61,741 phrases in 49,134 RCTs indicating almost significant results (8.65%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.58% to 8.73%). The overall prevalence of these phrases remained stable over time, with the most prevalent phrases being "marginally significant" (in 7,735 RCTs), "all but significant" (7,015), "a nonsignificant trend" (3,442), "failed to reach statistical significance" (2,578), and "a strong trend" (1,700). The strongest evidence for an increased temporal prevalence was found for "a numerical trend," "a positive trend," "an increasing trend," and "nominally significant." In contrast, the phrases "all but significant," "approaches statistical significance," "did not quite reach statistical significance," "difference was apparent," "failed to reach statistical significance," and "not quite significant" decreased over time. In a random sampled subset of 29,000 phrases, the manually identified and corresponding 11,926 P values, 68,1% ranged between 0.05 and 0.15 (CI: 67. to 69.0; median 0.06). Our results show that RCT reports regularly contain specific phrases describing marginally nonsignificant results to report P values close to but above the dominant 0.05 cutoff. The fact that the prevalence of the phrases remained stable over time indicates that this practice of broadly interpreting P values close to a predefined threshold remains prevalent. To enhance responsible and transparent interpretation of RCT results, researchers, clinicians, reviewers, and editors may reduce the focus on formal statistical significance thresholds and stimulate reporting of P values with corresponding effect sizes and CIs and focus on the clinical relevance of the statistical difference found in RCTs.

Association of Financial Conflicts of Interest With Academic Productivity Among Junior Faculty in Hematology and Oncology

INTRODUCTION: Financial conflicts of interest (COIs) represent a common and complex issue in hematology and oncology. However, little is known about the timing of when COIs begin to develop during a career trajectory. We evaluated self-reported COIs for junior faculty members at top cancer centers to determine how these financial relationships correlated with measures of academic career productivity. METHODS: We analyzed data from 230 assistant professors at 10 academic cancer centers. Financial COIs were identified from the CMS Open Payments (Sunshine Act dollars) database. Self-reported COIs were obtained from American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and American Society of Hematology (ASH) disclosures, and from disclosures in recent publications. Number of publications and h-index (defined as the largest number of publications [h] such that h publications each have at least h citations) were used as measures of academic productivity. Scatter plots and Spearman correlation coefficients were used to assess the relationship between COIs or Sunshine Act dollars with number of publications and h-index. Linear regression modeling was used to analyze the relationships between COIs or Sunshine Act dollars with number of publications and h-index, adjusting for years of experience since completing fellowship (YSF). RESULTS: A total of 46% of junior faculty had at least 1 COI. Number of COIs reported to ASCO/ASH was positively correlated with total Sunshine Act dollars (Spearman correlation, 0.53; P <.01). The number of COIs and the number of Sunshine Act dollars increased with years in practice (Spearman correlation, 0.38 and 0.25, respectively; P <.01 for both). COIs and Sunshine Act dollars correlated with h-index (Spearman correlation, 0.41 and 0.37, respectively; both P <.01). After adjusting for YSF, linear regression demonstrated that log-transformed h-index and number of publications were associated with Sunshine Act dollars (both P <.01) and COIs (ASCO/ASH) (both P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Financial COIs increased with number of YSF. Measures of academic productivity were positively correlated with COIs (ASCO/ASH) and Sunshine Act dollars. These data suggest that the cultivation of industry relationships is associated with the early academic productivity of junior faculty.

Identification of human gene research articles with wrongly identified nucleotide sequences.

Nucleotide sequence reagents underpin molecular techniques that have been applied across hundreds of thousands of publications. We have previously reported wrongly identified nucleotide sequence reagents in human research publications and described a semi-automated screening tool Seek & Blastn to fact-check their claimed status. We applied Seek & Blastn to screen >11,700 publications across five literature corpora, including all original publications in Gene from 2007 to 2018 and all original open-access publications in Oncology Reports from 2014 to 2018. After manually checking Seek & Blastn outputs for >3,400 human research articles, we identified 712 articles across 78 journals that described at least one wrongly identified nucleotide sequence. Verifying the claimed identities of >13,700 sequences highlighted 1,535 wrongly identified sequences, most of which were claimed targeting reagents for the analysis of 365 human protein-coding genes and 120 non-coding RNAs. The 712 problematic articles have received >17,000 citations, including citations by human clinical trials. Given our estimate that approximately one-quarter of problematic articles may misinform the future development of human therapies, urgent measures are required to address unreliable gene research articles.

Global cervical cancer research: A scientometric density equalizing mapping and socioeconomic analysis.

Cervical cancer has caused substantial morbidity and mortality for millions of women over the past decades. While enormous progress has been made in diagnosis, prevention and therapy, the disease is still fatal for many women-especially in low-income countries. Since no detailed studies are available on the worldwide research landscape, we here investigated the global scientific output related to this cancer type by an established protocol. The "New Quality and Quantity Indices in Science" platform assessed all relevant cervical cancer research published in the Web of Science since 1900. A detailed analysis was conducted including country-specific research productivity, indicators for scientific quality, and relation of research activity to socioeconomic and epidemiologic figures. Visualization of data was generated by the use of density equalizing map projections. Our approach identified 22,185 articles specifically related to cervical cancer. From a global viewpoint, the United States of America was the dominating country in absolute numbers, being followed by China and Japan. By contrast, the European countries Sweden, Austria, and Norway were positioned first when the research activity was related to the population number. When the scientific productivity was related to annual cervical cancer cases, Scandinavian countries (Finland #1, Sweden #4, Norway #5, Denmark #7), the Alpine countries Austria (#2) and Switzerland (#6), and the Netherlands (#3) were leading the field. Density equalizing mapping visualized that large parts of Africa and South America were almost invisible regarding the global participation in cervical cancer research. Our data documented that worldwide cervical cancer research activity is continuously increasing but is imbalanced from a global viewpoint. Also, the study indicated that global and public health aspects should be strengthened in cervical carcinoma research in order to empower more countries to take part in international research activities.