2,172 research outputs found
Flowchart of screening process (adapted from: Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, 2009).
No full text<p>Flowchart of screening process (adapted from: Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, 2009).</p
Inclusion of predatory journals in Scopus is inflating scholars’ metrics and advancing careers
No full textReprint--preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
No full textEditor's Note: PTJ's Editorial Board has adopted PRISMA to help PTJ better communicate research to physical therapists. For more, read Chris Maher's editorial starting on page 870.
Membership of the PRISMA Group is provided in the Acknowledgments.
This article has been reprinted with permission from the Annals of Internal Medicine from Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Ann Intern Med. Available at: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/151/4/264. The authors jointly hold copyright of this article. This article has also been published in PLoS Medicine, BMJ, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, and Open Medicine.
Copyright © 2009 Moher et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</jats:p
A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior
No full textAU Alongside: Pleaseconfirmthatallheadinglevelsarerepresentedcorrectly the growing concerns regarding predatory journal : growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. Among them, we explored the usefulness of the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index (level of inequality in the distribution of authorship among authors) as tools to identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors. We examined whether the PPMP, complemented by the Gini index, could be useful for identifying cases of potential editorial bias, using all articles in a sample of 5,468 biomedical journals indexed in the National Library of Medicine. For articles published between 2015 and 2019, the median PPMP was 2.9%, and 5% of journal exhibited a PPMP of 10.6% or more. Among the journals with the highest PPMP or Gini index values, where a few authors were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications, a random sample was manually examined, revealing that the most prolific author was part of the editorial board in 60 cases (61%). The papers by the most prolific authors were more likely to be accepted for publication within 3 weeks of their submission. Results of analysis on a subset of articles, excluding nonresearch articles, were consistent with those of the principal analysis. In most journals, publications are distributed across a large number of authors. Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications. To enhance trust in their practices, journals need to be transparent about their editorial and peer review practices
CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts
No full textHopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, Schulz KF; CONSORT Group
Report on a pilot project to introduce a publications officer
No full textFirst paragraph: Concerns about deficiencies in the reporting quality of biomedical research have been expressed for more than three decades. In spite of this, articles continue to pass through editorial and peer review processes and are published with critical aspects of their methods and results missing or inadequately described. Reporting biases also remain problematic. Together, these practices limit the integrity of biomedical literature and hinder reproducibility efforts. In an attempt to alleviate these problems, Moher and Altman recently proposed four potential contributory actions for journals and educational institutions to consider. Here, we present a description of our efforts to implement their first proposed action: the introduction of a publications officer
How predatory journals leak into PubMed
No full textPubMed, MEDLINE and PubMed Central are all funded by the
National Library of Medicine but are different databases.
• PubMed has been reported to include some articles published in
predatory journals.
• MEDLINE and PubMed policies for the selection of journals for
database inclusion are slightly different.
• Weaknesses in the criteria and procedures for indexing journals in
PubMed Central may allow publications from predatory journals
to leak into PubMed.
• Closing these loopholes is necessary to protect the integrity of
reputable databases and safeguard biomedical research
Publication by association: How the COVID-19 pandemic has shown relationships between authors and editorial board members in the field of infectious diseases
No full textDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the rush to scientific and political judgements on the merits of hydroxychloroquine was fuelled by dubious papers which may have been published because the authors were not independent from the practices of the journals in which they appeared. This example leads us to consider a new type of illegitimate publishing entity, 'self-promotion journals' which could be deployed to serve the instrumentalisation of productivity-based metrics, with a ripple effect on decisions about promotion, tenure and grant funding, but also on the quality of manuscripts that are disseminated to the medical community and form the foundation of evidence-based medicine
CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
No full textKenneth F Schulz, Douglas G Altman, David Moher... [Philippa Middleton... et al.] for the CONSORT Grou
- …
