KCSE
Ahead-of print articles
- Page Path
- HOME > Browse articles > Ahead-of print articles
Articles in E-pub version are posted online ahead of regular printed publication.
Correspondence
- Will widespread use of artificial intelligence tools in manuscript writing mark the end of human scholarship as we know it?
- Bor Luen Tang
- Received February 23, 2025 Accepted March 10, 2025 Published online April 10, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.366 [Epub ahead of print]
- 78 View
- 7 Download
Original Articles
- Evaluating North Korean academic medicine’s contributions to the international medical literature: a bibliometric study
- Andrew Holzman, Yongbin Kim, Jaewoo Park, Douglas Rappaport
- Received September 26, 2024 Accepted February 7, 2025 Published online April 10, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.365 [Epub ahead of print]
- 142 View
- 12 Download
-
Abstract
PDF - Purpose
We analyzed the bibliometric characteristics of articles authored by individuals affiliated with North Korean medical education institutions indexed in PubMed, using an expanded search strategy to update prior studies.
Methods
Our search revealed both a significantly larger number of publications and a greater capacity for substantive research with international impact than previously reported. We reviewed 331 records, selecting 79 for inclusion. For each publication, we collected data regarding the involvement of North Korean patients as primary research subjects, research methods employed, international partnerships, study topics, the impact factor of the publishing journal, and the number of cross-referencing citations.
Results
We identified 10 publications presenting primary data from North Korean patients, 3 of which involved prospective, randomized clinical trials. North Korean authors frequently collaborated with international partners—primarily from China, though some partnerships involved institutions in Europe and North America—while 11 publications were authored solely by North Korean researchers. Surgery was the most common subject, appearing in 20 publications; however, these articles were cited infrequently (an average of 1.4 citations per publication). In contrast, research in dermatology and traditional medicine demonstrated higher impact (10 and 4.7 cross-citations, respectively).
Conclusion
Our study clarifies the network of partnerships between North Korean medical educators and international institutions. We propose that North Korea’s capacity to engage in research meeting international clinical science standards may be greater than previously acknowledged, particularly in the field of traditional medicine.
- Vietnamese researchers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding open access publishing: a cross-sectional study
- Trung Thanh Nguyen, Ngoc Thi Bich Tran, Thai Binh An Nguyen, Huong Giang Bui, Hiep Hung Pham
- Received November 29, 2024 Accepted February 6, 2025 Published online April 2, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.364 [Epub ahead of print]
- 271 View
- 26 Download
-
Abstract
PDF
- Purpose
This study aimed to explore Vietnamese researchers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding open access (OA) publishing.
Methods
A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between May and July 2024, gathering responses from 238 Vietnamese researchers across diverse universities and disciplines. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to identify key trends in knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among different demographic groups.
Results
Vietnamese researchers primarily acquired information about OA through websites and colleagues, with ScienceOpen, PLOS, and SSRN serving as the main sources. Although they valued OA for its accessibility and broad dissemination, they expressed concerns regarding high publication fees and the quality of OA journals—particularly issues related to peer review rigor and potential risks to academic reputation.
Conclusion
The findings indicate strong support for OA publishing among Vietnamese researchers, despite ongoing concerns about high costs, journal credibility, and insufficient institutional support. Strengthening funding models, institutional advocacy, and quality assurance mechanisms is essential for building trust in OA and fostering a more inclusive scholarly environment.
First
Prev
