Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 12 de 12
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
mBio ; 10(3)2019 06 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31164459

RESUMO

We aimed to develop an in-depth understanding of quality criteria for scholarly journals by analyzing journals and publishers indexed in blacklists of predatory journals and whitelists of legitimate journals and the lists' inclusion criteria. To quantify content overlaps between blacklists and whitelists, we employed the Jaro-Winkler string metric. To identify topics addressed by the lists' inclusion criteria and to derive their concepts, we conducted qualitative coding. We included two blacklists (Beall's and Cabells Scholarly Analytics') and two whitelists (the Directory of Open Access Journals' and Cabells Scholarly Analytics'). The number of journals per list ranged from 1,404 to 12,357, and the number of publishers ranged from 473 to 5,638. Seventy-two journals and 42 publishers were included in both a blacklist and a whitelist. Seven themes were identified in the inclusion criteria: (i) peer review; (ii) editorial services; (iii) policy; (iv) business practices; (v) publishing, archiving, and access; (vi) website; and (vii) indexing and metrics. Business practices accounted for almost half of the blacklists' criteria, whereas whitelists gave more emphasis to criteria related to policy. Criteria could be allocated to four concepts: (i) transparency, (ii) ethics, (iii) professional standards, and (iv) peer review and other services. Whitelists gave most weight to transparency. Blacklists focused on ethics and professional standards. Whitelist criteria were easier to verify than those used in blacklists. Both types gave little emphasis to quality of peer review. Overall, the results show that there is overlap of journals and publishers between blacklists and whitelists. Lists differ in their criteria for quality and the weight given to different dimensions of quality. Aspects that are central but difficult to verify receive little attention.IMPORTANCE Predatory journals are spurious scientific outlets that charge fees for editorial and publishing services that they do not provide. Their lack of quality assurance of published articles increases the risk that unreliable research is published and thus jeopardizes the integrity and credibility of research as a whole. There is increasing awareness of the risks associated with predatory publishing, but efforts to address this situation are hampered by the lack of a clear definition of predatory outlets. Blacklists of predatory journals and whitelists of legitimate journals have been developed but not comprehensively examined. By systematically analyzing these lists, this study provides insights into their utility and delineates the different notions of quality and legitimacy in scholarly publishing used. This study contributes to a better understanding of the relevant concepts and provides a starting point for the development of a robust definition of predatory journals.


Assuntos
Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares/normas , Editoração/normas , Comunicação Acadêmica/normas , Estudos Transversais , Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos
4.
J Med Libr Assoc ; 107(1): 16-29, 2019 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30598645

RESUMO

Objective: PubMed's provision of MEDLINE and other National Library of Medicine (NLM) resources has made it one of the most widely accessible biomedical resources globally. The growth of PubMed Central (PMC) and public access mandates have affected PubMed's composition. The authors tested recent claims that content in PMC is of low quality and affects PubMed's reliability, while exploring PubMed's role in the current scholarly communications landscape. Methods: The percentage of MEDLINE-indexed records was assessed in PubMed and various subsets of records from PMC. Data were retrieved via the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) interface, and follow-up interviews with a PMC external reviewer and staff at NLM were conducted. Results: Almost all PubMed content (91%) is indexed in MEDLINE; however, since the launch of PMC, the percentage of PubMed records indexed in MEDLINE has slowly decreased. This trend is the result of an increase in PMC content from journals that are not indexed in MEDLINE and not a result of author manuscripts submitted to PMC in compliance with public access policies. Author manuscripts in PMC continue to be published in MEDLINE-indexed journals at a high rate (85%). The interviewees clarified the difference between the sources, with MEDLINE serving as a highly selective index of journals in biomedical literature and PMC serving as an open archive of quality biomedical and life sciences literature and a repository of funded research. Conclusion: The differing scopes of PMC and MEDLINE will likely continue to affect their overlap; however, quality control exists in the maintenance and facilitation of both resources, and funding from major grantors is a major component of quality assurance in PMC.


Assuntos
/normas , Armazenamento e Recuperação da Informação/normas , MEDLINE/normas , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/normas , PubMed/normas , Comunicação Acadêmica/normas , Humanos , National Library of Medicine (U.S.) , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Estados Unidos
5.
Intensive Care Med ; 45(1): 13-20, 2019 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30426140

RESUMO

PURPOSE: We set out to summarize the current challenges in academic conflict of interest. METHODS: This is a narrative review by a multidisciplinary, multinational panel of academic officers including deans of medical/pharmacy schools. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Disclosing conflict of interest has become the appropriate professional behavior since the 1990s in response to the necessity to fix moral and financial fences around medical activities. The nature of the conflict of interest is academic when either the conflict relates to academic duties and/or the nature of the interest is academic. People usually distinguish between real conflict of interest, when private interest overtly influences one's professional obligations; potential conflict of interest, when there is no obvious direct link between a person interests and current duties without ruling out that expected changes in duties cause a situation of conflict; and apparent conflict of interest, when the risk does not really exist, but serious doubts remain. Areas at risk of academic conflict of interest include peer review process for grant evaluation or journals, scientific communications such as elaborating and disseminating clinical guidelines, lecturing at meeting, advising decision-makers, teaching activities, and mentoring. The management of academic conflict of interest should consider actions in four domains, i.e., education, prevention, measures for enforcement and solving, and communication. Academic conflicts of interest are as frequent as financial conflicts but more difficult to identify and assess, and much less addressed in the literature. Generating more evidence from high-quality research is mandated to improve the management of academic and more generally non-financial conflicts of interest.


Assuntos
Conflito de Interesses , Comunicação Acadêmica/normas , Humanos , Revisão por Pares/métodos , Revisão por Pares/normas , Comunicação Acadêmica/tendências
6.
Trends Ecol Evol ; 33(11): 805-809, 2018 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30270172

RESUMO

Humanity builds upon scientific findings, but the credibility of science might be at risk in a 'postfactual' era of advanced information technologies. Here we propose a systemic change for science, to turn away from a growth paradigm and to refocus on quality, characterized by curiosity, surprise, discovery, and societal relevance.


Assuntos
Comunicação Acadêmica/normas , Ciência/normas , Valores Sociais , História do Século XVIII , História do Século XIX , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Editoração/economia , Editoração/ética , Ciência/ética , Ciência/história , Ciência/métodos
7.
Eur Urol ; 74(5): 644-650, 2018 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30177286

RESUMO

CONTEXT: Social media (SoMe) has transformed communication among health care professionals by enabling rapid and global information exchange. Yet, the novelty of SoMe and concerns about potential risks continue to be barriers to adoption. OBJECTIVE: To encourage appropriate professional use of SoMe by physicians in concordance with best practices and to update practical guidelines for effective and professional use of these communication technologies. EVIDENCE AQUISITION: The European Association of Urology (EAU; @Uroweb) brought together a committee of SoMe stakeholders in the urology field. PubMed and the grey literature were searched to identify SoMe position papers by other medical societies and organizations. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Updated practical guidelines for effective and professional use of SoMe communication technologies. A core of 10 practical recommendations for the responsible, ethical, and constructive use of SoMe communication technologies was articulated. The guidelines are limited by their inherent subjective nature and lack of robust evidence supporting their utility. CONCLUSIONS: SoMe is reshaping the way the urological care providers communicate; however, appropriate engagement requires courtesy, professionalism, and honesty. Adherence to guidelines will help users harness the benefits of SoMe in a safe and effective manner. PATIENT SUMMARY: Social media has transformed communication among health care professionals. This narrative review article provides an update of practical guidelines for effective and professional use of these communication technologies.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Comunicação Acadêmica , Mídias Sociais , Urologistas/educação , Urologia/educação , Atitude Frente aos Computadores , Confidencialidade , Comportamento Cooperativo , Humanos , Comunicação Interdisciplinar , Papel do Médico , Má Conduta Profissional , Profissionalismo , Comunicação Acadêmica/normas , Mídias Sociais/normas , Urologistas/psicologia , Urologistas/normas , Urologia/normas
8.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 101(4): 779-783, 2018 07 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29748099

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To evaluate the rate of non-doctoral student authors publishing in an academic journal over time and to analyze the effects student authors have on the scholarly impact of corresponding authors (CAs) by comparing their respective H-index (Hi). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A database was created of authors who published articles in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics in 2006, 2010, and 2014 that included CA, degree, and student author designations. Corresponding authors' His were obtained from Scopus (scopus.com). Student authorship rates were compared between the sampled years. The data were divided into 2 groups: CAs publishing with student authors (SA) and those without (nSA). The CAs' median and mean His with standard deviation and a 95% confidence interval were compared between SA and nSA. RESULTS: A total of 1728 published articles were identified with 1477 unique CAs. The percentage of published articles with student authors increased from 44.4% in 2006, to 52.9% in 2010, to 55.9% in 2014 (P = .0003). In overall analysis, mean Hi was higher for SA as compared with nSA (24.3 vs 22.9), although this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .094). Mean Hi (standard deviation) in 2006, 2010, and 2014 was 27.9 (16.6), 23.6 (16.7), and 18.5 (14.6), respectively. Mean Hi was significantly higher for SA compared with nSA in the years 2006 (29.5 vs 26.6, P = .048) and 2010 (24.9 vs 21.9, P = .038) but not in 2014 (18.5 vs 18.4, P = .963). CONCLUSION: Student authorship rates in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics are increasing. The data suggest that student participation in research may benefit both corresponding and student authors. Creating and expanding research programs to integrate research into medical education may enhance students' experience and encourage interest in radiation oncology.


Assuntos
Autoria , Bibliometria , Pesquisa Biomédica/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Radioterapia (Especialidade)/estatística & dados numéricos , Comunicação Acadêmica/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudantes de Medicina/estatística & dados numéricos , Pesquisa Biomédica/educação , Bases de Dados Bibliográficas , Humanos , Radioterapia (Especialidade)/educação , Comunicação Acadêmica/normas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA