Science Editing

Volume 6 August 2019

Editorial

Artificial intelligence and publishing: Kihong Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):89-90. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.168

5,987 View
210 Download
4 Web of Science
5 Crossref

PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Information support in scientific paper preparation management on the basis of intelligent review analysis
В.А. Латыпова
МОДЕЛИРОВАНИЕ, ОПТИМИЗАЦИЯ И ИНФОРМАЦИОННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ.2022; 10(1(36)): 5. CrossRef
Was the number of submissions to scholarly journals in Korea affected by the COVID-19 pandemic?
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 117. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted tools for redefining the communication landscape of the scholarly world
Habeeb Ibrahim Abdul Razack, Sam T. Mathew, Fathinul Fikri Ahmad Saad, Saleh A. Alqahtani
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 134. CrossRef
Impact of COVID-19 on the duration of the peer review process of the Journal of Animal Science and Technology
Sejong Oh
Science Editing.2020; 7(2): 198. CrossRef
Reflections as 2020 comes to an end: the editing and educational environment during the COVID-19 pandemic, the power of Scopus and Web of Science in scholarly publishing, journal statistics, and appreciation to reviewers and volunteers
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2020; 17: 44. CrossRef

Review

Ethical challenges regarding artificial intelligence in medicine from the perspective of scientific editing and peer review: Seong Ho Park, Young-Hak Kim, Jun Young Lee, Soyoung Yoo, Chong Jai Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):91-98. Published online June 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.164

15,882 View
442 Download
18 Web of Science
17 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This review article aims to highlight several areas in research studies on artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine that currently require additional transparency and explain why additional transparency is needed. Transparency regarding training data, test data and results, interpretation of study results, and the sharing of algorithms and data are major areas for guaranteeing ethical standards in AI research. For transparency in training data, clarifying the biases and errors in training data and the AI algorithms based on these training data prior to their implementation is critical. Furthermore, biases about institutions and socioeconomic groups should be considered. For transparency in test data and test results, authors should state if the test data were collected externally or internally and prospectively or retrospectively at first. It is necessary to distinguish whether datasets were convenience samples consisting of some positive and some negative cases or clinical cohorts. When datasets from multiple institutions were used, authors should report results from each individual institution. Full publication of the results of AI research is also important. For transparency in interpreting study results, authors should interpret the results explicitly and avoid over-interpretation. For transparency by sharing algorithms and data, sharing is required for replication and reproducibility of the research by other researchers. All of the above mentioned high standards regarding transparency of AI research in healthcare should be considered to facilitate the ethical conduct of AI research.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Towards Integration of Artificial Intelligence into Medical Devices as a Real-Time Recommender System for Personalised Healthcare: State-of-the-Art and Future Prospects
Talha Iqbal, Mehedi Masud, Bilal Amin, Conor Feely, Mary Faherty, Tim Jones, Michelle Tierney, Atif Shahzad, Patricia Vazquez
Health Sciences Review.2024; : 100150. CrossRef
The Knowledge of Students at Bursa Faculty of Medicine towards Artificial Intelligence: A Survey Study
Deniz GÜVEN, Elif Güler KAZANCI, Ayşe ÖREN, Livanur SEVER, Pelin ÜNLÜ
Journal of Bursa Faculty of Medicine.2024; 2(1): 20. CrossRef
New institutional theory and AI: toward rethinking of artificial intelligence in organizations
Ihor Rudko, Aysan Bashirpour Bonab, Maria Fedele, Anna Vittoria Formisano
Journal of Management History.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial intelligence technology in MR neuroimaging. А radiologist’s perspective
G. E. Trufanov, A. Yu. Efimtsev
Russian Journal for Personalized Medicine.2023; 3(1): 6. CrossRef
The minefield of indeterminate thyroid nodules: could artificial intelligence be a suitable diagnostic tool?
Vincenzo Fiorentino, Cristina Pizzimenti, Mariausilia Franchina, Marina Gloria Micali, Fernanda Russotto, Ludovica Pepe, Gaetano Basilio Militi, Pietro Tralongo, Francesco Pierconti, Antonio Ieni, Maurizio Martini, Giovanni Tuccari, Esther Diana Rossi, Gu
Diagnostic Histopathology.2023; 29(8): 396. CrossRef
Ethical, legal, and social considerations of AI-based medical decision-support tools: A scoping review
Anto Čartolovni, Ana Tomičić, Elvira Lazić Mosler
International Journal of Medical Informatics.2022; 161: 104738. CrossRef
Transparency of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Insights from Professionals in Computing and Healthcare Worldwide
Jose Bernal, Claudia Mazo
Applied Sciences.2022; 12(20): 10228. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence in the water domain: Opportunities for responsible use
Neelke Doorn
Science of The Total Environment.2021; 755: 142561. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence for ultrasonography: unique opportunities and challenges
Seong Ho Park
Ultrasonography.2021; 40(1): 3. CrossRef
Key Principles of Clinical Validation, Device Approval, and Insurance Coverage Decisions of Artificial Intelligence
Seong Ho Park, Jaesoon Choi, Jeong-Sik Byeon
Korean Journal of Radiology.2021; 22(3): 442. CrossRef
Is it alright to use artificial intelligence in digital health? A systematic literature review on ethical considerations
Nicholas RJ Möllmann, Milad Mirbabaie, Stefan Stieglitz
Health Informatics Journal.2021; 27(4): 146045822110523. CrossRef
Presenting machine learning model information to clinical end users with model facts labels
Mark P. Sendak, Michael Gao, Nathan Brajer, Suresh Balu
npj Digital Medicine.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial intelligence with multi-functional machine learning platform development for better healthcare and precision medicine
Zeeshan Ahmed, Khalid Mohamed, Saman Zeeshan, XinQi Dong
Database.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
The ethics of machine learning in medical sciences: Where do we stand today?
Treena Basu, Sebastian Engel-Wolf, Olaf Menzer
Indian Journal of Dermatology.2020; 65(5): 358. CrossRef
Key principles of clinical validation, device approval, and insurance coverage decisions of artificial intelligence
Seong Ho Park, Jaesoon Choi, Jeong-Sik Byeon
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2020; 63(11): 696. CrossRef
Reflections as 2020 comes to an end: the editing and educational environment during the COVID-19 pandemic, the power of Scopus and Web of Science in scholarly publishing, journal statistics, and appreciation to reviewers and volunteers
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2020; 17: 44. CrossRef
What should medical students know about artificial intelligence in medicine?
Seong Ho Park, Kyung-Hyun Do, Sungwon Kim, Joo Hyun Park, Young-Suk Lim
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2019; 16: 18. CrossRef

Original Articles

Frequently covered diseases in North Korean internal medicine journal Internal Medicine [Naegwa]—Secondary publication: Shin Ha, Yo Han Lee; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):99-105. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.169

6,555 View
141 Download
4 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose
This study aimed to investigate the distribution of research fields and diseases in the North Korean internal medicine journal by using a content analysis and a frequency analysis method.
Methods
All 2,092 articles published in Internal Medicine [Naegwa], a North Korean medical journal, from the first issue of 2006 to the last of 2015, were searched and classified by subspecialty of internal medicines, diseases, and classification codes of the Korean Standard Classification of Diseases version 6.
Results
In total, 1,392 out of the 2,092 articles were classified into the internal medicine field, with the remaining 700 classified as basic medicine, family medicine, or anesthesiology. Among the articles on internal medicine, most concerned the digestive system, followed by circulatory, respiratory, renal, and endocrine systems. Among the 700 articles in other fields, articles on gynecology were most common. According to the analysis of diseases, the most commonly studied in internal medicine were gastrointestinal diseases, hypertension, respiratory infectious diseases, glomerular diseases, and diabetes. Meanwhile, cerebrovascular diseases, herpes zoster, mental and behavioral disorders, and urinary tumors were most covered in the other fields. In the distribution by classification code of the Korean Standard Classification of Diseases version 6, circulatory and digestive diseases accounted for 42.4% of articles.
Conclusion
The results of this study are expected to be exploited to estimate the disease distribution and disease burden in North Korea.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Review of North Korean Reports on Cardiovascular Disease Research and Management
Yun-Seok Choi, Junhyeong Hwang, Min-Ji Lee, Jung-Hun Lee, Ho-Joong Youn
Yonsei Medical Journal.2023; 64(5): 309. CrossRef
Mapping the development of North Korea's domestic nuclear research networks
Philip Baxter, Justin V. Hastings, Philseo Kim, Man‐Sung Yim
Review of Policy Research.2022; 39(2): 219. CrossRef
A critical examination of international research conducted by North Korean authors: Increasing trends of collaborative research between China and North Korea
Eungi Kim, Eun Sil Kim
Scientometrics.2020; 124(1): 429. CrossRef
Surgical Diseases in North Korea: An Overview of North Korean Medical Journals
Sejin Choi, Taehoon Kim, Soyoung Choi, Hee Young Shin
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020; 17(24): 9346. CrossRef

Korean medical students’ knowledge about and attitudes towards plagiarism according to their commission of plagiarism: Man Sup Lim, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):106-111. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.170

6,286 View
153 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose
This study investigated Korean medical students’ knowledge about and attitudes towards plagiarism according to their commission of plagiarism. Furthermore, the institutional environment regarding plagiarism was assessed.
Methods
A questionnaire provided by Turnitin was distributed to 67 first-year medical students of Hallym University, Korea in December 17, 2015 through SurveyMonkey, a web survey platform. Of the 67 subjects, responses from 60 students (89.6%) were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a comparative analysis.
Results
The respondents’ average knowledge level about plagiarism, measured as the item difficulty index for the relevant 8 items, was 0.658 (maximum 1). More than half did not know where they could find guidance about how to reference others’ work. They were only a little confident (41.7%) or not confident (11.7%) in referencing others’ work. They felt that plagiarism was not dealt with seriously at the university (53.3%). Eighty percent of students wanted their instructors to use text-matching software to check students’ work, and many of them thought that text-matching software helps them to spend more time making sure that references are correct (48.3%). Forty-six (75.4%) students reported having copied and pasted from the internet for their work without citing the original work. There were no significant differences in knowledge about plagiarism, attitudes towards classmates who plagiarize, or recommended actions against classmates who plagiarize according to whether students had committed plagiarism.
Conclusion
The medical students’ knowledge about plagiarism was insufficient. This medical school should introduce more intensive training on how to correctly reference others’ work and on the concept of plagiarism.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Integrity of clinical research conduct, reporting, publishing, and post-publication promotion in rheumatology
Durga Prasanna Misra, Vikas Agarwal
Clinical Rheumatology.2020; 39(4): 1049. CrossRef

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals: Hyung Wook Choi, Ye Jin Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):112-121. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.171

7,089 View
134 Download
10 Web of Science
14 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
Four international associations, including the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Committee on Publication Ethics, and the World Association of Medical Editors declared the third version of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” to ensure transparency and quality in journal publications. This study is aimed at assessing the guidelines from the journals’ websites manually.
Methods
In this study, three researchers investigate the homepages of 781 academic society-published journals that are registered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and whether these journals are effectively adopting these new guidelines. In this paper, 33 items from the guidelines are examined. The 33 items are rearranged into four different categories: basic journal information; publication ethics; copyright and archiving information; and profit model. The researchers count yes or no after checking the adopting status on the journal homepage and dividing into four scales: 0% to 25% for is rarely practiced, 26% to 50% for is poorly practiced, 51% to 75% for is adequately practiced, and 76% to 100% for is well practiced.
Results
Of the 33 items, 10 are found to be poorly or rarely practiced, including readership, data sharing, archiving policies, and profit model information.
Conclusion
It could be the most up-to-date indicator of the current status of applying best practice guidelines. Society journal editors especially from Asia should evaluate their journals regarding “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing”.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Opening up to the open data
Prakash K. Dubey
Journal of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences.2024; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
The COPE / DOAJ / OASPA / WAME Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing: A Critical Analysis
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Salim Moussa
ETHICS IN PROGRESS.2024; 15(1): 130. CrossRef
Prestige of scholarly book publishers—An investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries
Eleonora Dagienė
Research Evaluation.2023; 32(2): 356. CrossRef
The use of data repositories in dermatology
Umer Nadir, Loma Dave, Michael D. Yi, Farhana Ikmal Hisham, Murad Alam
Archives of Dermatological Research.2023; 315(6): 1851. CrossRef
Promotion to Top-Tier Journal and Development Strategy of the Annals of Laboratory Medicine for Strengthening its Leadership in the Medical Laboratory Technology Category: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Annals of Laboratory Medicine.2022; 42(3): 321. CrossRef
Cumplimiento de Estándares Internacionales en Publicaciones Arbitradas Académicas Mexicanas y Guatemaltecas
Humberto Emilio Aguilera Arévalo
Revista Académica Sociedad del Conocimiento Cunzac.2022; 2(1): 89. CrossRef
Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals
Brian Jackson
Publications.2021; 9(2): 25. CrossRef
Document Network and Conceptual and Social Structures of Clinical Endoscopy from 2015 to July 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 641. CrossRef
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
Changes in bibliographic information associated with Korean scientific journals from 2011 to 2019
Yoon Joo Seo, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 11. CrossRef
Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports
Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 24. CrossRef
Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal
Sun Huh
Ultrasonography.2020; 39(3): 238. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. CrossRef
Recent trends in medical journals’ data sharing policies and statements of data availability
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(06): 493. CrossRef

How many retracted articles indexed in KoreaMed were cited 1 year after retraction notification: Soo Young Kim, Hyun Jung Yi, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):122-127. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.172

7,797 View
128 Download
9 Web of Science
8 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
It aimed to investigate how many retracted articles indexed in KoreaMed were cited in both the Scopus and the Korea Medical Citation Index (KoMCI) databases and to investigate whether the frequency of post-retraction citations was different according to the presence of a retraction mark.
Methods
Retracted articles from the KoreaMed database were collected on January 28, 2016. Scopus and KoMCI were searched for post-retraction citations, which were defined as citations 1 year after the retraction, excluding retraction-related citations.
Results
The 114 retracted articles were found in KoreaMed. The proportion of retracted articles in KoreaMed, the Korean medical journal database, through January 2016 was 0.04% (114/256,000). On the journal homepage, a retraction mark was present for 49 of the 114 retracted articles. Of the 114 retracted articles, 45 were cited in Scopus 176 times. Of the 176 citations, 109 (of 36 retracted articles) were post-retraction citations. The number of citations in KoMCI, except for citations of retraction notices, was 33 (of 14 retracted articles). Of those citations, the number of post-retraction citations in KoMCI was 14 (of 8 retracted articles). The presence of a retraction mark did not influence post-retraction citations (P>0.05). Post-retraction citations were frequent in the range of 1 to 3 years.
Conclusion
Post-retraction citations that were found in both Scopus and the KoMCI occurred frequently for retracted articles in KoreaMed. Adoption of Crossmark is recommended as one choice to prevent post-retraction citations.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Expert-recommended biomedical journal articles: Their retractions or corrections, and post-retraction citing
Peiling Wang, Jing Su
Journal of Information Science.2024; 50(1): 17. CrossRef
The indexation of retracted literature in seven principal scholarly databases: a coverage comparison of dimensions, OpenAlex, PubMed, Scilit, Scopus, The Lens and Web of Science
José Luis Ortega, Lorena Delgado-Quirós
Scientometrics.2024; 129(7): 3769. CrossRef
Exploring perception of retraction based on mentioned status in post-retraction citations
Xiaojuan Liu, Chenlin Wang, Dar-Zen Chen, Mu-Hsuan Huang
Journal of Informetrics.2022; 16(3): 101304. CrossRef
Inconsistent and incomplete retraction of published research: A cross-sectional study on Covid-19 retractions and recommendations to mitigate risks for research, policy and practice
Geoff Frampton, Lois Woods, David Alexander Scott, Eleanor Ochodo
PLOS ONE.2021; 16(10): e0258935. CrossRef
Continued use of retracted papers: Temporal trends in citations and (lack of) awareness of retractions shown in citation contexts in biomedicine
Tzu-Kun Hsiao, Jodi Schneider
Quantitative Science Studies.2021; 2(4): 1144. CrossRef
Does retraction after misconduct have an impact on citations? A pre–post study
Cristina Candal-Pedreira, Alberto Ruano-Ravina, Esteve Fernández, Jorge Ramos, Isabel Campos-Varela, Mónica Pérez-Ríos
BMJ Global Health.2020; 5(11): e003719. CrossRef
Comprehensive Analysis of Retracted Publications in Dentistry: A 23-Year Review
Shannon Samuel, Joe Mathew Cherian, Abi M. Thomas, Stefano Corbella
International Journal of Dentistry.2020; 2020: 1. CrossRef
Continued post-retraction citation of a fraudulent clinical trial report, 11 years after it was retracted for falsifying data
Jodi Schneider, Di Ye, Alison M. Hill, Ashley S. Whitehorn
Scientometrics.2020; 125(3): 2877. CrossRef

Internal affairs: the fate of authors from the University of the Philippines accused of plagiarism, 1990s to 2010s: Miguel Paolo P. Reyes, Joel F. Ariate; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):128-136. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.173

22,596 View
400 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
This study centers on 25 cases of plagiarism in scientific publications committed by faculty members and students of the University of the Philippines and dealt with by eight of the university’s academic publishers.
Methods
We focus on the publishers’ responses to these cases, details of which we obtained from various sources, vis-à-vis the University of the Philippines’ policies on plagiarism.
Results
The responses to plagiarism were found to vary, at times seemingly arbitrarily, but tended toward protecting the identities or details of the accused, unless the case became publicized.
Conclusion
Such maintenance of confidentiality is inimical to the fulfillment of academic publishers’ duties to the rest of the academic community. We herein suggest policies to address the identified deficits.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Fragmented or centralized?: Comparative case study of ethical frameworks for social research in Philippines and Taiwan
Jayson Troy F. Bajar
International Journal of Ethics Education.2022; 7(2): 235. CrossRef

Case Studys

How should medical researchers respond to false copyright infringement claims?: Sung Pil Park, Eric Yong Joong Lee; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):137-141. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.174

12,895 View
350 Download
1 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Serious concerns have been raised about the Morisky Medication Adherence Scales (MMAS-4 and MMAS-8) ever since researchers from Asia and other regions were claimed to have used the MMAS without a license. Donald Morisky and his team have claimed that numerous authors have infringed copyright, trademark, or other rights over the MMAS. This case study will scrutinize whether the MMAS is protected by any intellectual property rights, including copyright and trademark. In many cases, the authors have not applied the MMAS for their research, but have only introduced or described the MMAS in papers that are accessible and open to the public. The MMAS is a measure to keep track of and check the regularity and accuracy with which patients take their medications; it is not meant as a diagnosis and does not form a basis for treatment plans. If another researcher rephrases the questions in a way that achieves a certain level of originality, not infringing the original expressions of the MMAS, then Morisky and his team may not be able to claim infringement of its copyright. Even assuming that the MMAS is subject to copyright, the authors can raise a “fair use” defense. Concerted actions may be necessary for researchers to protect academic integrity and the public nature of scholarly works. The fair use of the MMAS in a scholarly article should not be barred by false copyright infringement claims.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Drug compliance and the Morisky Adherence Scale: An expression of concern and a warning
Alain Li‐Wan‐Po, Gregory M. Peterson
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics.2021; 46(1): 1. CrossRef
Questionnaires and scores for assessing medication adherence — advantages and disadvantages of the diagnostic method in research and actual clinical practice
Yu. V. Lukina, N. P. Kutishenko, S. Yu. Martsevich, O. M. Drapkina
Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention.2020; 19(3): 2562. CrossRef

Compliance of education journals in Vietnam with the minimum criteria to be indexed in the ASEAN Citation Index and Scopus: Trung Tran, Loc Thi My Nguyen, Thanh Thi Nghiem, Hien Thi Thu Le, Cuong Huu Nguyen, Thuy Phuong La, Trung Tien Nguyen, Hang Thi-Thu Nguyen; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):142-147. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.175

7,964 View
127 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: This study aimed at elucidating the present situation of scholarly journals published in Vietnam according to the minimum criteria to be indexed in the ASEAN Citation Index (ACI) and Scopus, with the goal of suggesting development strategies for scholarly journals in Vietnam. From the 387 journals accredited by the Vietnamese State Council for Professorship, 13 education journals were arbitrarily selected, and their compliance with the five minimum criteria for the ACI (peer review, timeliness, abstracts in English, references in Roman script, and a website in English) and the six minimum criteria for Scopus (peer review, timeline, abstracts in English, references in Roman characters, Electronic International Standard Serial Number [ISSN], and publication ethics) were assessed. Two of the 13 journals were eligible to be indexed in the ACI, while none fulfilled the minimum criteria to be indexed in Scopus. An urgent task for the editors of those journals is to establish an informative journal homepage in English that provides basic information on the journal. Then, an Electronic ISSN can be obtained from the ISSN International Center. Furthermore, the following steps are suggested for journal promotion: establishment of appropriate editorial policies and publication ethics procedures, improvement of research integrity, enhancement of the journals’ reputation in the international scientific community, and improvement of the online publishing system by adopting a journal manuscript management system. To achieve those goals, financial support from the Vietnamese government will be invaluable.

Essays

Establishment of the Indonesian Association of Scientific Journal Editors: Komang G. Wiryawan; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):148-150. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.176

5,999 View
110 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Policies of scholarly journal accreditation in Indonesia
Prakoso Bhairawa Putera, Suryanto Suryanto, Sinta Ningrum, Ida Widianingsih, Yan Rianto
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 166. CrossRef
Presidential address: How to cope with the present environment of scholarly journal publishing
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 1. CrossRef

Self-promotions and advertising: are they a common practice for boosting altmetric scores?: Sai Krishna Gudi, Swarna Priya Basker; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):151-153. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.177

6,222 View
119 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Plain‐language summaries: An essential component to promote knowledge translation
Sai Krishna Gudi, Komal Krishna Tiwari, Kainat Panjwani
International Journal of Clinical Practice.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
References and Citations: Is It Time to Update Their Format?
Sai Krishna Gudi, Komal Krishna Tiwari, Rahamthulla Shaik
International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism.2021;[Epub] CrossRef

Meeting Reports

Promoting scholarly journals internationally: Russian editors and publishers’ passion: Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):154-156. Published online July 17, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.167

4,943 View
138 Download

PDF

Issues advocated at 2019 annual meeting of the Council of Science Editors: Cheol-Heui Yun; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):157-163. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.178

6,172 View
93 Download

PDF

Workshop for scholarly journal publishing 2019: Hye In Park; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):164-165. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.179

5,657 View
91 Download

PDF

Training Material

How publishers can work with Crossref on data citation: Rachael Lammey; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):166-170. Published online July 5, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.165

6,139 View
172 Download
5 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Abstract PDF

It aims to explain why data citation is important, how publishers and data repositories can do this and what use will be made of the information they provide. There are large benefits to be accrued from sharing research data such as guarantee of reproducibility and transparency. Consistent citation practice around data is essential to helping these benefits to be realized. Data citation metadata is being disseminated and used through its application programming interfaces and the Event Data application programming interface. Event Data extracts this information into a separate service, so data citations are pre-filtered from the Crossref metadata. There are two methods by which publishers can register data citation information with Crossref. The first method is to deposit data citations in the citation section of the metadata, i.e., the part containing the reference list of the article. The second method publishers can use to register data citations with Crossref is to use the relationships section of the metadata. There are a number of services already using Event Data to show information on data citation. To achieve the benefits of data citation, publishers or editors should have a data sharing and citation policy so that they share with their authors and readers.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Reflections on 4 years in the role of a Crossref ambassador in Korea
Jae Hwa Chang
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 69. CrossRef
Presidential address: the Korean Council of Science Editors as a board member of Crossref from March 2021 to February 2024
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 1. CrossRef
Status of the data sharing policies of scholarly journals published in Brazil, France, and Korea and listed in both the 2018 Scimago Journal and Country Ranking and the Web of Science
Geum Hee Jeong
Science Editing.2020; 7(2): 136. CrossRef
Two international public platforms for the exposure of Archives of Plastic Surgery to worldwide researchers and surgeons: PubMed Central and Crossref
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2020; 47(5): 377. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 2
Next
Last

Previous issues