Correspondence in the British Journal of Anaesthesia from 2018-21: article types, authorship, and COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tan S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9666373 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correspondence in the British Journal of Anaesthesia from 2018-21: article types, authorship, and COVID-19.
British journal of anaesthesia 20221116 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:An increasing amount of infectious diseases research is conducted in low-income countries (LIC) given their high burden of disease; however, the contribution of LIC investigators as measured by authorship metrics, specifically to infectious diseases research, has not been thoroughly studied. We performed a literature search for primary research conducted either within LICs or using samples from LIC participants published between 1998-2017 in the Infectious Disease Society of America-affiliated journals Clinical Infectious Diseases, Journal of Infectious Diseases, and Open Forum Infectious Diseases. Primary outcomes included proportion of LIC-affiliated first and last authors (i.e. lead authors) per year and authorship trends over time. Secondary outcomes included proportion of LIC-affiliated authorship by geographic distribution and disease focus. Among 1308 publications identified, 50% had either a first or last LIC-affiliated author. Among these authors, 48% of LIC-affiliated first authors and 52% of LIC-affiliated last authors also reported a non-LIC institutional affiliation. While the absolute number of articles by LIC-affiliated lead authors increased over the 20-year period, the proportion of articles with LIC-affiliated lead authors decreased. There is a growing literature for infectious disease research conducted in LICs yet authorship trends in a small subset of these publications demonstrate a pronounced and worsening exclusion of LIC-affiliated investigators from publishing as lead authors.
| S-EPMC10021251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Airway management is required during general anaesthesia and is essential for life-threatening conditions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Evidence from recent trials indicates a high incidence of critical events during airway management, especially in neonates or infants. It is important to define the optimal techniques and strategies for airway management in these groups. In this joint European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) and British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) guideline on airway management in neonates and infants, we present aggregated and evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in providing safe and effective medical care. We identified seven main areas of interest for airway management: i) preoperative assessment and preparation; ii) medications; iii) techniques and algorithms; iv) identification and treatment of difficult airways; v) confirmation of tracheal intubation; vi) tracheal extubation, and vii) human factors. Based on these areas, Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) questions were derived that guided a structured literature search. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to formulate the recommendations based on those studies included with consideration of their methodological quality (strong '1' or weak '2' recommendation with high 'A', medium 'B' or low 'C' quality of evidence). In summary, we recommend: 1. Use medical history and physical examination to predict difficult airway management (1С). 2. Ensure adequate level of sedation or general anaesthesia during airway management (1B). 3. Administer neuromuscular blocker before tracheal intubation when spontaneous breathing is not necessary (1С). 4. Use a videolaryngoscope with an age-adapted standard blade as first choice for tracheal intubation (1B). 5. Apply apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation in neonates (1B). 6. Consider a supraglottic airway for rescue oxygenation and ventilation when tracheal intubation fails (1B). 7. Limit the number of tracheal intubation attempts (1C). 8. Use a stylet to reinforce and preshape tracheal tubes when hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades are used and when the larynx is anatomically anterior (1C). 9. Verify intubation is successful with clinical assessment and end-tidal CO 2 waveform (1C). 10. Apply high-flow nasal oxygenation, continuous positive airway pressure or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory support, when appropriate (1B).
| S-EPMC10720842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany authors are concerned which types of peer-review articles can be cited most in academics and who were the highest-cited authors in a scientific discipline. The prerequisites are determined by: (1) classifying article types; and (2) quantifying co-author contributions. We aimed to apply Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) with social network analysis (SNA) and an authorship-weighted scheme (AWS) to meet the prerequisites above and then demonstrate the applications for scholars.MethodsBy searching the PubMed database (pubmed.com), we used the keyword "Medicine" [journal] and downloaded 5,636 articles published from 2012 to 2016. A total number of 9,758 were cited in Pubmed Central (PMC). Ten MeSH terms were separated to represent the journal types of clusters using SNA to compare the difference in bibliometric indices, that is, h, g, and x as well as author impact factor(AIF). The methods of Kendall coefficient of concordance (W) and one-way ANOVA were performed to verify the internal consistency of indices and the difference across MeSH clusters. Visual representations with dashboards were shown on Google Maps.ResultsWe found that Kendall W is 0.97 (χ = 26.22, df = 9, P < .001) congruent with internal consistency on metrics across MeSH clusters. Both article types of methods and therapeutic use show higher frequencies than other 8 counterparts. The author Klaus Lechner (Austria) earns the highest research achievement(the mean of core articles on g = Ag = 15.35, AIF = 21, x = 3.92, h = 1) with one paper (PMID: 22732949, 2012), which was cited 23 times in 2017 and the preceding 5 years.ConclusionPublishing article type with study methodology and design might lead to a higher IF. Both classifying article types and quantifying co-author contributions can be accommodated to other scientific disciplines. As such, which type of articles and who contributes most to a specific journal can be evaluated in the future.
| S-EPMC6824745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveJournal impact factor (JIF) is often used as a measure of journal quality. A retrospective cohort study determined the ability of clinical article and journal characteristics, including appraisal measures collected at the time of publication, to predict subsequent JIFs.MethodsClinical research articles that passed methods quality criteria were included. Each article was rated for relevance and newsworthiness by 3 to 24 physicians from a panel of more than 4,000 practicing clinicians. The 1,267 articles (from 103 journals) were divided 60∶40 into derivation (760 articles) and validation sets (507 articles), representing 99 and 88 journals, respectively. A multiple regression model was produced determining the association of 10 journal and article measures with the 2007 JIF.ResultsFour of the 10 measures were significant in the regression model: number of authors, number of databases indexing the journal, proportion of articles passing methods criteria, and mean clinical newsworthiness scores. With the number of disciplines rating the article, the 5 variables accounted for 61% of the variation in JIF (R(2) = 0.607, 95% CI 0.444 to 0.706, P<0.001).ConclusionFor the clinical literature, measures of scientific quality and clinical newsworthiness available at the time of publication can predict JIFs with 60% accuracy.
| S-EPMC3257484 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7833914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Assessment of authorship contribution is often based on unreliable questionnaires. OBJECTIVE: To assess if the use of different formats for the disclosure of authorship contributions influences authors' compliance with the criteria of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). DESIGN: Randomized study. PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Eight hundred sixty-five authors of 181 manuscripts submitted to the Croatian Medical Journal from January to July 2005 were randomly allocated into 2 groups: 456 authors (94 manuscripts) received an ordinal rating form to rate their contributions to the submitted manuscript in 12 categories on a scale from 0 (none) to 4 (full), whereas 409 authors (87 manuscripts) received a binary rating form to tick the categories in which they made a contribution. RESULTS: The ordinal rating form identified twice as many authors (87.9%) as meeting the ICMJE criteria than the binary rating form (39.2%, P < .001). The group answering the ordinal rating form also had 5 times more manuscripts (71.6%) with all authors meeting the ICMJE criteria than the binary rating form group (15.5%, P < .001). The fraction of authors who reported contributions on each item on the binary rating form was similar to the fraction of authors who reported at least moderate participation to the same items on the ordinal rating form except "Final approval of the article." CONCLUSIONS: Ordinal scales for reporting authors' contributions to manuscripts were more sensitive than tick boxes for assessing the appropriateness of authorship. The exception is "Final approval of the article," which should be considered a dichotomous variable and may not be appropriate for the ICMJE definition of authorship.
| S-EPMC2518038 | biostudies-other
Project description:Bibliographic references containing citation information of academic literature play an important role as a medium connecting earlier and recent studies. As references contain machine-readable metadata such as author name, title, or publication year, they have been widely used in the field of citation information services including search services for scholarly information and research trend analysis. Many institutions around the world manually extract and continuously accumulate reference metadata to provide various scholarly services. However, manually collection of reference metadata every year continues to be a burden because of the associated cost and time consumption. With the accumulation of a large volume of academic literature, several tools, including GROBID and CERMINE, that automatically extract reference metadata have been released. However, these tools have some limitations. For example, they are only applicable to references written in English, the types of extractable metadata are limited for each tool, and the performance of the tools is insufficient to replace the manual extraction of reference metadata. Therefore, in this study, we focused on constructing a high-quality corpus to automatically extract metadata from multilingual journal article references. Using our constructed corpus, we trained and evaluated a BERT-based transfer-learning model. Furthermore, we compared the performance of the BERT-based model with that of the existing model, GROBID. Currently, our corpus contains 3,815,987 multilingual references, mainly in English and Korean, with labels for 13 different metadata types. According to our experiment, the BERT-based model trained using our corpus showed excellent performance in extracting metadata not only from journal references written in English but also in other languages, particularly Korean. This corpus is available at http://doi.org/10.23057/47.
| S-EPMC9858828 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Psychophysiology, the flagship journal of psychophysiological research, has played a key role in the field for 60 years. For the present study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis assessing the journal's development in terms of performance, authorship trends, and thematic content for this time span. Over the years, Psychophysiology has experienced a consistent increase in manuscript submissions, published articles, and impact factor. Authorship trends showed larger, more diverse author teams, with a growing percentage of female first authors now representing about 50% of submissions and an increase in international collaborations. Thematic content has evolved, shifting from peripheral measures to central nervous system measures like EEG and ERPs while maintaining the journal's long-standing emphasis on methodological advancements. Research topics have expanded from basic stimulus processing to more complex investigations into emotion, cognition, and psychopathology, with growing interdisciplinary integration. This article provides a quantitative overview of Psychophysiology's contributions and development, aimed at offering insights into the journal's past, current state, and potential future directions in psychophysiological research.
| S-EPMC11788248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWomen are currently underrepresented in academic psychiatry. As publication activity reflects both leadership and participation in academia, we examined temporal trends in women's authorship by conducting a large-scale bibliometric study of psychiatry journals.MethodsWe examined changes in proportions of women in the first, last, and overall authorship positions over time; relationship to journal impact factor and editorial board makeup; and rates of transition to senior author status using original research articles published in the 24 highest-impact psychiatry journals between January 2008 and May 2018.ResultsIn 30,934 articles, women represented 40.0% of all authors in 2008 and 44.8% in 2018, with a significant increase in the percentage of women as first authors (2008: 43.5%, 2018: 49.5%; B = 0.64, p = .002) and last authors over time (2008: 30.0%, 2018: 35.7%; B = 0.64, p = 1 × 10-5). Articles with women as last authors were significantly more likely than those with men as last authors to have a woman as first author (χ21 = 126.1, p < 2.2 × 10-16). Women exhibited slower rates of transition to the last author position (log rank p = 2 × 10-16); time to 10% transition was 5 years for men and 9 years for women.ConclusionsThese results indicate continued improvement in the representation of women authors in psychiatry journals, resulting in near parity in first authors. However, slower rates of transition to the senior author position and continued underrepresentation of women as senior authors suggest ongoing challenges in achieving gender parity in academic leadership. At the present rate of change for last authors (0.64% increase per year), women would achieve parity in senior authorship in ∼20 to 25 years.
| S-EPMC6699930 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this article, we study the development of the STS journal article format since the 1980s. Our analysis is based on quantitative data that suggest that the diversity of various journal publication types has diminished over the past four decades, while the format of research articles has become increasingly typified. We contextualize these historical shifts in qualitative terms, drawing on a set of 76 interviews with STS scholars and other stakeholders in scholarly publishing. Here, we first portray the STS publication culture of the 1980s and early 1990s. We then contrast this with an analysis of publishing practices today, which are characterized by a much more structured research process that is largely organized around the production of typified journal articles. Whereas earlier studies have often emphasized the importance of rhetorical persuasion strategies as drivers in the development of scholarly communication formats, our analysis highlights a complementary and historically novel set of shaping factors, namely, increasingly quantified research (self-)assessment practices in the context of a projectification of academic life. We argue that reliance on a highly structured publication format is a distinct strategy for making STS scholarship 'doable' in the sense of facilitating the planning ability and daily conduct of research across a variety of levels - including the writing process, collaboration with peers, attracting funding, and interaction with journals. We conclude by reflecting on the advantages and downsides of the typification of journal articles for STS.
| S-EPMC9483190 | biostudies-literature