Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 7.818
Filtrar
4.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237804, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32817699

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Peer review is a volunteer process for improving the quality of publications by providing objective feedback to authors, but also presents an opportunity for reviewers to seek personal reward by requesting self-citations. Open peer review may reduce the prevalence of self-citation requests and encourage author rebuttal over accession. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of self-citation requests and their inclusion in manuscripts in a journal with open peer review. METHODS: Requests for additional references to be included during peer review for articles published between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018 in BMC Medicine were evaluated. Data extracted included total number of self-citations requested, self-citations that were included in the final published manuscript and manuscripts that included at least one self-citation, and compared with corresponding data on independent citations. RESULTS: In total, 932 peer review reports from 373 manuscripts were analysed. At least one additional citation was requested in 25.9% (n = 241) of reports. Self-citation requests were included in 44.4% of reports requesting additional citations (11.5% of all reports). Requests for self-citation were significantly more likely than independent citations to be incorporated in the published manuscript (65.1% vs 52.1%; chi-square p = 0.003). At the manuscript level, when requested, self-citations were incorporated in 76.6% of manuscripts (n = 72; 19.3% of all manuscripts) compared with 68.5% of manuscripts with independent citation requests (n = 102; 27.3% of manuscripts). A significant interaction was observed between the presence of self-citation requests and the likelihood of any citation request being incorporated (100% incorporation in manuscripts with self-citation requests alone versus 62.7-72.2% with any independent citation request; Fisher's exact test p<0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Requests for self-citations during the peer review process are common. The transparency of open peer review may have the unexpected effect of encouraging authors to incorporate self-citation requests by disclosing peer reviewer identity.


Assuntos
Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares/normas , Revisão por Pares/normas , Editoração/normas , Autoria , Feminino , Medicina Geral , Humanos , Fator de Impacto de Revistas , Masculino
5.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0236927, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32780771

RESUMO

Although the peer review system of academic journals is seen as fundamental to scientific achievement, a major threat to the validity of the system is a potential evaluation bias resulting from constraints at the journal level. In this study, we examine how the time pressure to maintain a fixed periodical quota for journal publication can influence a journal editor's decision to accept or reject a paper at any given point in time. We find that an increase in publication backlog, proxied as the average delay between paper acceptance and print publication, is correlated with an increase in the subsequent rejection rates of new submissions. Our findings suggest that time pressures inherent in the peer review system may be a source of potential evaluator bias, calling for a need to reconsider the current quota system.


Assuntos
Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos , Fator de Impacto de Revistas , Modelos Estatísticos , Revisão por Pares , Fatores de Tempo
6.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(27): e256, 2020 Jul 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32657090

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a large volume of publications, a barrage of non-reviewed preprints on various professional repositories and a slew of retractions in a short amount of time. METHODS: We conducted an e-survey using a cloud-based website to gauge the potential sources of trustworthy information and misinformation and analyzed researchers', clinicians', and academics' attitude toward unpublished items, and pre- and post-publication quality checks in this challenging time. RESULTS: Among 128 respondents (mean age, 43.2 years; M:F, 1.1:1), 60 (46.9%) were scholarly journal editors and editorial board members. Social media channels were distinguished as the most important sources of information as well as misinformation (81 [63.3%] and 86 [67.2%]). Nearly two in five (62, 48.4%) respondents blamed reviewers, editors, and misinterpretation by readers as additional contributors alongside authors for misinformation. A higher risk of plagiarism was perceived by the majority (70, 58.6%), especially plagiarism of ideas (64.1%) followed by inappropriate paraphrasing (54.7%). Opinion was divided on the utility of preprints for changing practice and changing retraction rates during the pandemic period, and higher rejections were not supported by most (76.6%) while the importance of peer review was agreed upon by a majority (80, 62.5%). More stringent screening by journal editors (61.7%), and facilitating open access plagiarism software (59.4%), including Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based algorithms (43.8%) were among the suggested solutions. Most (74.2%) supported the need to launch a specialist bibliographic database for COVID-19, with information indexed (62.3%), available as open-access (82.8%), after expanding search terms (52.3%) and following due verification by academics (66.4%), and journal editors (52.3%). CONCLUSION: While identifying social media as a potential source of misinformation on COVID-19, and a perceived high risk of plagiarism, more stringent peer review and skilled post-publication promotion are advisable. Journal editors should play a more active role in streamlining publication and promotion of trustworthy information on COVID-19.


Assuntos
Comunicação , Editoração , Má Conduta Científica , Mídias Sociais , Adulto , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Revisão por Pares , Plágio , Pneumonia Viral , Inquéritos e Questionários
7.
S Afr Med J ; 110(5): 364-368, 2020 Apr 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32657718

RESUMO

In everyday clinical practice, healthcare professionals (HCPs) are exposed to large quantities of confidential patient information, and many use WhatsApp groups to share this information. WhatsApp groups provide efficient mechanisms for clinical management advice, decision-making support and peer review. However, most HCPs do not fully understand the legal and ethical implications of sharing content in a WhatsApp group setting, which is often thought to be hosted on a secure platform and therefore removed from public scrutiny. In our paper, we unpack the legal and ethical issues that arise when information is shared in WhatsApp groups. We demonstrate that sharing content in this forum is tantamount to the publication of content; in other words, those who share content are subject to the same legal ramifications as a journalist would be. We also examine the role of the WhatsApp group administrator, who bears an additional legal burden by default, often unknowingly so. We consider the recommendations made by the Health Professions Council of South Africa in their guidelines for the use of social media, and highlight some areas where we feel the guidelines may not adequately protect HCPs from the legal repercussions of sharing content in a WhatsApp group. Finally, we provide a set of guidelines for WhatsApp group users that should be regularly posted onto the group by the relevant group administrator to mitigate some of the legal liabilities that may arise. We also provide guidelines for group administrators.


Assuntos
Responsabilidade Legal , Aplicativos Móveis/ética , Aplicativos Móveis/legislação & jurisprudência , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Comunicação , Confidencialidade/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , Revisão por Pares , Mídias Sociais/legislação & jurisprudência , África do Sul
8.
J Nurs Adm ; 50(7-8): 402-406, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32701645

RESUMO

An internal peer-reviewed journal was created to promote high-quality nursing practice, improve patient outcomes, and inspire nurses at an academic medical center. The goal of the journal was to increase nurses' utilization of evidence-based practice (EBP). The publication provides a platform that facilitates the dissemination of nursing research and supports the implementation of EBP across the organization.


Assuntos
Difusão de Inovações , Enfermagem Baseada em Evidências/organização & administração , Pesquisa em Enfermagem , Revisão por Pares , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Poder Psicológico , Competência Clínica , Humanos , Projetos de Pesquisa , Inquéritos e Questionários
10.
PLoS One ; 15(7): e0234912, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32609759

RESUMO

The association between mention of scientific research in popular media (e.g., the mainstream media or social media platforms) and scientific impact (e.g., citations) has yet to be fully explored. The purpose of this study was to clarify this relationship, while accounting for some other factors that likely influence scientific impact (e.g., the reputations of the scientists conducting the research and academic journal in which the research was published). To accomplish this purpose, approximately 800 peer-reviewed articles describing original research were evaluated for scientific impact, popular media attention, and reputations of the scientists/authors and publication venue. A structural equation model was produced describing the relationship between non-scientific impact (popular media) and scientific impact (citations), while accounting for author/scientist and journal reputation. The resulting model revealed a strong association between the amount of popular media attention given to a scientific research project and corresponding publication and the number of times that publication is cited in peer-reviewed scientific literature. These results indicate that (1) peer-reviewed scientific publications receiving more attention in non-scientific media are more likely to be cited than scientific publications receiving less popular media attention, and (2) the non-scientific media is associated with the scientific agenda. These results may inform scientists who increasingly use popular media to inform the general public and scientists concerning their scientific work. These results might also inform administrators of higher education and research funding mechanisms, who base decisions partly on scientific impact.


Assuntos
Meios de Comunicação/tendências , Disseminação de Informação/métodos , Publicações/tendências , Bibliometria , Humanos , Fator de Impacto de Revistas , Revisão por Pares/tendências , Pesquisa/tendências , Mídias Sociais/tendências
12.
Niger Postgrad Med J ; 27(3): 250-258, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32687128

RESUMO

Research misconduct policy (RMP) is a legal document that shows the definitions of the various types of misconduct, describes the inquiry and investigation of allegations, and the appropriate penalties that should be imposed. The presence of the adopted RMP on the website of a university or postgraduate college is an indication of the level of commitment to promote the proper handling of misconduct cases. Perusal of the websites of top universities in developing countries revealed that many do not have RMP on their websites. The probable starting point for combating research misconduct at the national or institutional level is by acquisition of RMP. The purpose of this article is to propose a modern, structured and cost-effective RMP for universities and postgraduate colleges in developing countries. The bibliographic database, PubMed, was searched using the terms 'research misconduct' and 'research misconduct policy'. All relevant articles from the search and some RMPs of universities, national agencies and global health organisations available on the Internet were carefully studied. A formulated RMP, based on the Final Rule of the United States, Public Health Services Policies on Research Misconduct of 2005 and the Regulations of the University Grants Commission of India of 2018, is hereby presented. In the proposed RMP, plagiarism was stratified into four levels in ascending order of severity so that imposed penalties are commensurate with the seriousness of misconduct. The zero tolerance for plagiarism in the core work areas was adopted. The proposed RMP was designed to act as a template. It should be modified as required based on the prevailing local circumstances and made fit for purpose. Universities, postgraduate colleges and journals should have RMP on the homepage of their websites.


Assuntos
Autoria/normas , Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Plágio , Editoração/ética , Pesquisadores/ética , Má Conduta Científica/ética , Academias e Institutos , Países em Desenvolvimento , Ética em Pesquisa , Humanos , Revisão por Pares/normas , Editoração/normas , Universidades
13.
EMBO Rep ; 21(6): e50817, 2020 06 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-526747

RESUMO

Pre-print servers have helped to rapidly publish important information during the COVID-19 pandemic. The downside is the risk of spreading false information or fake news though.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Editoração , Publicações Seriadas , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Decepção , Humanos , Internet , Revisão por Pares , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Editoração/normas , Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações Seriadas/normas
14.
EMBO Rep ; 21(6): e50817, 2020 06 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-560371

RESUMO

Pre-print servers have helped to rapidly publish important information during the COVID-19 pandemic. The downside is the risk of spreading false information or fake news though.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Editoração , Publicações Seriadas , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Decepção , Humanos , Internet , Revisão por Pares , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Editoração/normas , Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações Seriadas/normas
15.
Value Health ; 23(6): 689-696, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32540225

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Value and health technology assessment (V/HTA) is often used in clinical, access, and reimbursement decisions. V/HTA data-source selection may not be transparent, which is a necessary element for stakeholder understanding and trust and for fostering accountability among decision makers. Peer review is considered one mechanism for judging data trustworthiness. Our objective was (1) to use publicly available documentation of V/HTA methods to identify requirements for inclusion of peer-reviewed evidence sources, (2) to compare and contrast US and non-US approaches, and (3) to assess evidence sources used in published V/HTA reports. METHODS: Publicly available methods documentation from 11 V/HTA organizations in North America and Europe were manually searched and abstracted for descriptions of requirements and recommendations regarding search strategy and evidence-source selection. The bibliographies of a subset of V/HTA reports published in 2018 were manually abstracted for evidence-source types used in each. RESULTS: Heterogeneity in evidence-source retrieval and selection was observed across all V/HTA organizations, with more pronounced differences between US and non-US organizations. Not all documentation of organizations' methods address the evidence-source selection processes (7 of 11), and few explicitly reference peer-reviewed sources (3 of 11). Documentation of the evidence-source selection strategy was inconsistent across reports (6 of 13), and the level of detail provided varied across organizations. Some information on evidence-source selection was often included in confidential documentation and was not publicly available. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities exist among V/HTA organizations in requirements and guidance regarding evidence-source selection. Standardization of evidence-source selection strategies and documentation could help improve V/HTA transparency and has implications for decision making based on report findings.


Assuntos
Documentação/normas , Revisão por Pares , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica/métodos , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , América do Norte
16.
Phys Ther ; 100(9): 1516-1541, 2020 08 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32488264

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies aimed at improving the adherence of physical therapists' treatment choices to clinical practice guidelines for a range of musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: For this review, searches were performed in several databases combining terms synonymous with "practice patterns" and "physical therapy" until August 2019. The review included randomized controlled trials that investigated any intervention to improve the adherence of physical therapists' treatment choices to clinical practice guidelines or research evidence. Treatment choices assessed by surveys, audits of clinical notes, and treatment recording forms were the primary measures of adherence. Self-reported guideline adherence was the secondary measure. Three reviewers independently assessed risk of bias. Because of heterogeneity across studies, only a narrative synthesis of the results was performed. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. Four demonstrated a positive effect on at least 1 measure of treatment choices for low back pain and acute whiplash. One involved a comparison with no intervention, and 3 involved a comparison with another active intervention. The interventions that demonstrated a positive effect included dissemination of clinical practice guidelines, with additional elements including interactive educational meetings (3 studies), tailored interventions and monitoring of the performance of health care delivery (1 study), peer assessment (1 study), and local opinion leaders plus educational outreach visits (1 study). CONCLUSIONS: Although this review revealed limited trials evaluating interventions to increase physical therapists' use of evidence-based treatments for musculoskeletal conditions compared with no intervention, it highlighted some interventions that may be effective. IMPACT: Dissemination of clinical practice guidelines, interactive educational meetings, tailored interventions and monitoring the performance of health care delivery, peer assessment, and use of local opinion leaders plus educational outreach visits should be implemented to improve physical therapists' adherence to clinical practice guidelines for a range of musculoskeletal conditions.


Assuntos
Prática Clínica Baseada em Evidências , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Doenças Musculoesqueléticas/reabilitação , Fisioterapeutas , Adulto , Viés , Comportamento de Escolha , Assistência à Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , Dor Lombar/reabilitação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Osteoartrite do Quadril/reabilitação , Osteoartrite do Joelho/reabilitação , Revisão por Pares , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Autorrelato , Traumatismos em Chicotada/reabilitação
17.
Phys Ther ; 100(9): 1603-1631, 2020 08 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32542403

RESUMO

A clinical practice guideline on total knee arthroplasty was developed by an American Physical Therapy (APTA) volunteer guideline development group that consisted of physical therapists, an orthopedic surgeon, a nurse, and a consumer. The guideline was based on systematic reviews of current scientific and clinical information and accepted approaches to management of total knee arthroplasty.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho/normas , Osteoartrite do Joelho/cirurgia , Fisioterapeutas , Cuidados Pós-Operatórios/normas , Crioterapia/normas , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/métodos , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/normas , Exercício Físico , Humanos , Terapia Passiva Contínua de Movimento/normas , Movimento , Osteoartrite do Joelho/etiologia , Alta do Paciente , Revisão por Pares , Cuidados Pós-Operatórios/métodos , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios , Prognóstico , Melhoria de Qualidade , Amplitude de Movimento Articular , Treinamento de Resistência/métodos , Treinamento de Resistência/normas , Fatores de Risco
18.
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA