Science Editing

Original Articles

How Spanish educational researchers used Twitter/X as a platform to promote the dissemination of scientific knowledge: a descriptive study: Elias Said-Hung, Sergio Arce-García, Daria Mottareale-Calvanese; Sci Ed. 2024;11(2):123-133. Published online June 26, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.336

1,423 View
26 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose
This study aimed to examine how educational researchers in Spain promoted the dissemination of scientific knowledge on Twitter/X as a platform and to contrast their approach with science influencers in the same country.
Methods
Accounts on the Twitter/X service belonging to 210 Spanish researchers were analyzed, and their 2016–2020 tweets were compared to those of 38 Twitter/X influencers. Text mining techniques, sentiment and emotion analysis, network analysis, and the Kardashian index (K-index) were used in the study.
Results
The results indicated a low academic presence of researchers (4.4%) on Twitter/X. The researchers shared 185,020 posts (38.7% original content and 61.3% retweets). A network analysis revealed low interconnectivity among researchers, with distinct clusters based on their interests or affiliations. The top influencers had strong connections with the news media. The researchers focused minimally on academic topics, while the influencers emphasized the dissemination of scientific findings. The impact of the researchers’ posts was minimal, with low K-index values, whereas the influencers had greater reach because of their follower base.
Conclusion
When using Twitter/X, the researchers had a minimal impact on the dissemination of scientific information because they published few original posts and relied instead on retweets unrelated to their academic or research activities. Consequently, the researchers did not use Twitter/X as a tool for scientific communication, which limited the potential for forming new connections beyond their existing social and academic networks. Promoting informal learning that encompasses diverse knowledge and learning levels is crucial to fostering greater engagement and collaboration.

Changes in the absolute numbers and proportions of open access articles from 2000 to 2021 based on the Web of Science Core Collection: a bibliometric study: Jeong-Wook Seo; Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):45-56. Published online February 16, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.296

4,068 View
265 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose
The ultimate goal of current open access (OA) initiatives is for library services to use OA resources. This study aimed to assess the infrastructure for OA scholarly information services by tabulating the number and proportion of OA articles in a literature database.
Methods
We measured the absolute numbers and proportions of OA articles at different time points across various disciplines based on the Web of Science (WoS) database.
Results
The number (proportion) of available OA articles between 2000 and 2021 in the WoS database was 12 million (32.4%). The number (proportion) of indexed OA articles in 1 year was 0.15 million (14.6%) in 2000 and 1.5 million (48.0%) in 2021. The proportion of OA by subject categories in the cumulative data was the highest in the multidisciplinary category (2000–2021, 79%; 2021, 89%), high in natural sciences (2000–2021, 21%–46%; 2021, 41%–62%) and health and medicine (2000–2021, 37%–40%; 2021, 52%–60%), and low in social sciences and others (2000–2021, 23%–32%; 2021, 36%–44%), engineering (2000–2021, 17%–33%; 2021, 31%–39%) and humanities and arts (2000–2021, 11%–22%; 2021, 28%–38%).
Conclusion
Our study confirmed that increasingly many OA research papers have been published in the last 20 years, and the recent data show considerable promise for better services in the future. The proportions of OA articles differed among scholarly disciplines, and designing library services necessitates several considerations with regard to the customers’ demands, available OA resources, and strategic approaches to encourage the use of scholarly OA articles.

Training Materials

The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals: Pippa Smart; Sci Ed. 2022;9(1):79-84. Published online February 20, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.269

7,022 View
357 Download
11 Web of Science
17 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This article presents the growth and development of preprints to help authors, editors, and publishers understand and adopt appropriate strategies for incorporating preprints within their scholarly communication strategies. The article considers: preprint history and evolution, integration of preprints and journals, and the benefits and disadvantages, and challenges that preprints offer. The article discusses the two largest and most established preprint servers, arXiv.org (established in 1991) and SSRN (1994), the OSF (Open Science Foundation) initiative that supported preprint growth (2010), bioRxiv (2013), and medRxiv (2019). It then discusses six different levels of acceptance of preprints within journals: uneasy relationship, acceptance of preprint articles, encouraging authors to preprint their articles, active participation with preprints, submerger by reviewing preprints, and finally merger and overlay models. It is notable that most journals now accept submissions that have been posted as preprints. The benefits of preprints include fast circulation, priority publication, increased visibility, community feedback, and contribution to open science. Disadvantages include information overload, inadequate quality assurance, citation dilution, information manipulation and inflation of results. As preprints become mainstream it is likely that they will benefit authors but disadvantage publishers and journals. Authors are encouraged to preprint their own articles but to be cautious about using preprints as the basis for their own research. Editors are encouraged to develop preprint policies and be aware that double-blind review is not possible with preprinting of articles and that allowing citations to preprints is to be encouraged. In conclusion, journal-related stakeholders should consider preprints as an unavoidable development, taking into consideration both the benefits and disadvantages.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Seeing the forest for the trees and the changing seasons in the vast land of scholarly publishing
Soo Jung Shin
Science Editing.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
To preprint or not to preprint: A global researcher survey
Rong Ni, Ludo Waltman
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2024; 75(6): 749. CrossRef
Open publishing of public health research in Africa: an exploratory investigation of the barriers and solutions
Pasipanodya Ian Machingura Ruredzo, Dominic Dankwah Agyei, Modibo Sangare, Richard F. Heller
Insights the UKSG journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Exploring the current dynamics of preprints
Raj Rajeshwar Malinda, Dipika Mishra, Ruchika Bajaj, Alin Khaliduzzaman
Current Medical Research and Opinion.2024; 40(6): 1047. CrossRef
Publishing Embargoes and Versions of Preprints: Impact on the Dissemination of Information
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang, Maryna Nazarovets
Open Information Science.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Accelerated acceptance time for preprint submissions: a comparative analysis based on PubMed
Dan Tian, Xin Liu, Jiang Li
Scientometrics.2024; 129(7): 3787. CrossRef
Are Preprints a Threat to the Credibility and Quality of Artificial Intelligence Literature in the ChatGPT Era? A Scoping Review and Qualitative Study
Michael Agyemang Adarkwah, A. Y. M. Atiquil Islam, Käthe Schneider, Rose Luckin, Michael Thomas, Jonathan Michael Spector
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction.2024; : 1. CrossRef
A perspective on the Center for Open Science (COS) preprint servers
J. A. Teixeira da Silva
Science Editor and Publisher.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2. CrossRef
Most Preprint Servers Allow the Publication of Opinion Papers
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Serhii Nazarovets
Open Information Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The rise of preprints in earth sciences
Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
F1000Research.2023; 12: 561. CrossRef
The rise of preprints in earth sciences
Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
F1000Research.2023; 12: 561. CrossRef
Sharing the wealth: a proposal for discipline-based repositories of shared educational resources
Ellen Austin
Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education.2023; 27(4): 131. CrossRef
The experiences of COVID-19 preprint authors: a survey of researchers about publishing and receiving feedback on their work during the pandemic
Narmin Rzayeva, Susana Oliveira Henriques, Stephen Pinfield, Ludo Waltman
PeerJ.2023; 11: e15864. CrossRef
An attempt to explain the partial 'silent' withdrawal or retraction of a SAGE Advance preprint
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
Publishing Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review
Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Beth Giddins, Robin Haunschild
PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291627. CrossRef
Dissemination of Registered COVID-19 Clinical Trials (DIRECCT): a cross-sectional study
Maia Salholz-Hillel, Molly Pugh-Jones, Nicole Hildebrand, Tjada A. Schult, Johannes Schwietering, Peter Grabitz, Benjamin Gregory Carlisle, Ben Goldacre, Daniel Strech, Nicholas J. DeVito
BMC Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef

Scientific journals should be transformed into science storytellers to improve their visibility: Kwangil Oh; Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):193-197. Published online August 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.255

7,536 View
162 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

What is the objective for science journals to publish research papers? Would it be enough to collect research manuscripts and simply publish them in print or on the web? Science journal publishers have always strived to find ways of disseminating journal content to as many readers as possible. It is now time for science journal publishers to think about why a journal should be published; whether it is acceptable for valuable scientific findings to lie dormant in a journal’s archive; and whether traditional science communication is still effective. The present article suggests that science journals should transform themselves into science storytellers to improve the visibility and discoverability of their research findings. First, a new communication network between journals, authors, peers, the public, and policymakers is required. Second, conversion of media from academic language to plain language is critical to broadening the audience. Third, audio-visual content should be introduced into journal publishing to facilitate easy comprehension of the content. Fourth, research-focused channels, including EurekAlert, Medium, and social networking service channels are recommended as new media to propagate journals’ content to researchers. Improving visibility and discoverability is an urgent mission, especially for small society journals. To achieve this mission, science journals should be adapted to become storytellers and science communicators, as suggested above. A small society journal’s editor is not merely an editor, but an editor-publisher; therefore, editors should understand and take on this role.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The Chinese Early Warning Journal List: Strengths, weaknesses and solutions in the light of China's global scientific rise
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Serhii Nazarovets, Timothy Daly, Graham Kendall
The Journal of Academic Librarianship.2024; 50(4): 102898. CrossRef

Review

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; Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):134-144. Published online July 27, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.244

21,518 View
802 Download
17 Web of Science
18 Crossref

Abstract PDF

The flood of research output and increasing demands for peer reviewers have necessitated the intervention of artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. Although human input is seen as essential for writing publications, the contribution of AI slowly and steadily moves ahead. AI may redefine the role of science communication experts in the future and transform the scholarly publishing industry into a technology-driven one. It can prospectively improve the quality of publishable content and identify errors in published content. In this article, we review various AI and other associated tools currently in use or development for a range of publishing obligations and functions that have brought about or can soon leverage much-demanded advances in scholarly communications. Several AI-assisted tools, with diverse scope and scale, have emerged in the scholarly market. AI algorithms develop summaries of scientific publications and convert them into plain-language texts, press statements, and news stories. Retrieval of accurate and sufficient information is prominent in evidence-based science publications. Semantic tools may empower transparent and proficient data extraction tactics. From detecting simple plagiarism errors to predicting the projected citation impact of an unpublished article, AI’s role in scholarly publishing is expected to be multidimensional. AI, natural language processing, and machine learning in scholarly publishing have arrived for writers, editors, authors, and publishers. They should leverage these technologies to enable the fast and accurate dissemination of scientific information to contribute to the betterment of humankind.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Slow Writing with ChatGPT: Turning the Hype into a Right Way Forward
Chitnarong Sirisathitkul
Postdigital Science and Education.2024; 6(2): 431. CrossRef
Navigating the impact: a study of editors’ and proofreaders’ perceptions of AI tools in editing and proofreading
Islam Al Sawi, Ahmed Alaa
Discover Artificial Intelligence.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Beyond Plagiarism: ChatGPT as the Vanguard of Technological Revolution in Research and Citation
Hanni B. Flaherty, Jackson Yurch
Research on Social Work Practice.2024; 34(5): 483. CrossRef
Capítulo 3. Inteligencia Artificial en la comunicación científica
Sofía E. Calle-Pesántez, José Moisés Pallo-Chiguano
Espejo de Monografías de Comunicación Social.2024; (23): 59. CrossRef
MAATrica: a measure for assessing consistency and methods in medicinal and nutraceutical chemistry papers
Giulia Panzarella, Alessandro Gallo, Sandra Coecke, Maddalena Querci, Francesco Ortuso, Martin Hofmann-Apitius, Pierangelo Veltri, Jürgen Bajorath, Stefano Alcaro
European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry.2024; 273: 116522. CrossRef
Use and Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Philippine Higher Education: Reflections from Instructors and Administrators
Louie Giray, Paolo Yves De Silos, Adonis Adornado, Robbie Jan Vincent Buelo, Elbert Galas, Ethel Reyes-Chua, Cereneo Santiago, Ma. Leah Ulanday
Internet Reference Services Quarterly.2024; 28(3): 315. CrossRef
Empowering knowledge through AI: open scholarship proactively supporting well trained generative AI
Beth Montague-Hellen
Insights the UKSG journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Euroscepticism: a meta-analysis
Paolo Marzi
Acta Politica.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Between tech and text: the use of generative AI in Palestinian universities - a ChatGPT case study
Bilal Hamamra, Asala Mayaleh, Zuheir N. Khlaif
Cogent Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted medical writing: With greater power comes greater responsibility
Rhythm Bains
Asian Journal of Oral Health and Allied Sciences.2023; 13: 2. CrossRef
Emergence of the metaverse and ChatGPT in journal publishing after the COVID-19 pandemic
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
Author-Profile-Based Journal Recommendation for a Candidate Article: Using Hybrid Semantic Similarity and Trend Analysis
Mehmet Yașar Bayraktar, Mehmet Kaya
IEEE Access.2023; 11: 45826. CrossRef
Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing class: How do Indonesian students perceive?
Santi Pratiwi Tri Utami, Andayani Andayani, Retno Winarni, Sumarwati Sumarwati
Contemporary Educational Technology.2023; 15(4): ep450. CrossRef
The impact of generative AI tools on researchers and research: Implications for academia in higher education
Abdulrahman M. Al-Zahrani
Innovations in Education and Teaching International.2023; : 1. CrossRef
Editorial policies of Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions on the use of generative artificial intelligence in article writing and peer review
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 40. CrossRef
Current Status of Neurointervention, the Official Journal of the Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology
Dae Chul Suh, Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2022; 17(2): 67. CrossRef
Profiles of Technology Use and Plagiarism in High School Education
Juan Carlos Torres-Diaz, Pablo Vicente Torres Carrión, Isidro Marín Gutierrez
SSRN Electronic Journal .2021;[Epub] CrossRef

Original Articles

Preprint acceptance policies of Asian academic society journals in 2020: Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):10-17. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.224

5,020 View
135 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
In the current era of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the trend of sharing new research results through preprint platforms is receiving more attention from researchers than ever before. Preprints have been recognized as a primary and essential method to disseminate new findings faster than traditional publications. Therefore, it has become necessary for journals and editors to acknowledge these changes, prepare preprint policies, and notify authors accordingly. This study aimed to review the status of preprint policies of international publishers and Asian academic society journals.
Methods
In total, 383 Asian academic society journals registered in Science Citation Index Expanded were selected as a dataset for analysis between December 11, 2020 and January 8, 2021. Three different parameters were investigated whether each journal had a preprint policy, whether journals allowed preprint manuscripts to be submitted, and whether preprint articles were allowed to be included in the references.
Results
Among the 383 Asian academic society journals from 22 countries, only 28 journals accepted preprint manuscripts, and eight allowed the use of preprint manuscripts as references. Japan had the most journals that both had preprint policies and accepted preprint manuscripts, with 13 journals, followed by Korea with 10 journals.
Conclusion
Despite the limitations of this study, the results show that editors and journal staff should understand the current preprint trend and try to prepare preprint policies that best meet the journals’ and authors’ interests.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 76(1): 3. CrossRef
The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review
Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Beth Giddins, Robin Haunschild
PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291627. 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
The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals
Pippa Smart
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 79. CrossRef
Congratulations on Child Health Nursing Research becoming a PubMed Central journal and reflections on its significance
Sun Huh
Child Health Nursing Research.2022; 28(1): 1. CrossRef
Korean editors’ and researchers’ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies
Hyun Jung Yi, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 4. 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

A bibliometric analysis of COVID-19 research published in nursing journals: Juyeon Oh, Aekyung Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(2):118-124. Published online August 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.205

7,959 View
292 Download
26 Web of Science
24 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
This bibliometric study investigated the current state of documents on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) published in nursing journals. The analysis focused on the description of most productive journals, institutions, and countries, as well as the characteristics of the documents.
Methods
The publications analyzed in this study were retrieved from the Web of Science database with search keywords. The searches used to establish the study dataset were last updated on July 10, 2020. The inclusion criteria were relevant English-language publications in journals published in the Science Citation Index Expanded or Social Science Citation Index. Content analysis of original articles and reviews was done.
Results
An analysis of 125 publications on COVID-19 from 48 journals showed that the most productive journal and country were the Journal of Clinical Nursing (n = 18) and the USA (n = 53), respectively. Original articles (n = 27, 21.6%) and review papers (n = 4, 3.2%) accounted for 24.8% of the articles, and the highest number of papers were found in early access (published ahead of print) (n = 51, 40.8%) and Q1 journals (n = 73, 58.4%). The content analysis found 10 data-based original articles or reviews, which dealt with the topics of nurse training (n = 2), nurses’ psychosocial status (n = 2), nursing research methodology (n = 1), nursing guidelines (n = 4), and protection for nurses (n = 1).
Conclusion
This study presents the current situation of nursing research on COVID-19 based on an analysis of publications in nursing journals and provides meaningful information to nursing researchers and editorial board members. The number of data-based original articles on nursing related to COVID-19 remains low.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Description and Analysis of Research on Death and Dying during the COVID-19 Pandemic, Published in Nursing Journals Indexed in SCOPUS
Leticia Cuellar-Pompa, José Ángel Rodríguez-Gómez, María Mercedes Novo-Muñoz, Natalia Rodríguez-Novo, Yurena M. Rodríguez-Novo, Carlos-Enrique Martínez-Alberto
Nursing Reports.2024; 14(2): 655. CrossRef
Characteristics and quality of reporting qualitative nursing research related to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic search and critical review
Ian-In Vong, Monique Rothan-Tondeur, Rita Georges Nohra
BMC Nursing.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
An investigation of emerging COVID-19 research trends and future implications for LIS field: A bibliometric mapping and visualization
Arslan Sheikh, Nadeem Siddique, Saima Qutab, Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Khalid Mahmood
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science.2023; 55(1): 3. CrossRef
Community-based tourism in East Asia: A bibliometric research note
Aaron Tham, Shirley Wei Lee Chin
Tourism and Hospitality Research.2023; 23(3): 459. CrossRef
Factors associated with preventive behaviors for COVID-19 among adolescents in South Korea
Sunhee Park, Sumi Oh
Journal of Pediatric Nursing.2022; 62: e69. CrossRef
Synergistic networks of COVID-19’s top papers
Nosrat Riahinia, Farshid Danesh, Somayeh GhaviDel
Library Hi Tech.2022; 40(2): 454. 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
A Bibliometric Analysis on Global Psychological and Behavioral Research Landscape on COVID-19 Pandemic
Xilu Dong, Xuqiu Wei, Fei Shu, Qiang Su, Juntao Wang, Ning Liu, Junping Qiu
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(2): 879. CrossRef
A bibliometric analysis of COVID‐19 publications in nursing by visual mapping method
Ayşe Çiçek Korkmaz, Serap Altuntaş
Journal of Nursing Management.2022; 30(6): 1892. CrossRef
Between panic and motivation: did the first wave of COVID-19 affect scientific publishing in Mediterranean countries?
Mona Farouk Ali
Scientometrics.2022; 127(6): 3083. CrossRef
Eye-Related COVID-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Production Indexed in Scopus
Verónica García-Pascual, Elvira García-Beltrán, Begoña Domenech-Amigot
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(16): 9927. CrossRef
Coronavirus disease-19 in environmental fields: a bibliometric and visualization mapping analysis
Shaher H. Zyoud, Ahed H. Zyoud
Environment, Development and Sustainability.2021; 23(6): 8895. CrossRef
A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020
Leonardo B. Furstenau, Bruna Rabaioli, Michele Kremer Sott, Danielli Cossul, Mariluza Sott Bender, Eduardo Moreno Júdice De Mattos Farina, Fabiano Novaes Barcellos Filho, Priscilla Paola Severo, Michael S. Dohan, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2021; 18(3): 952. CrossRef
Nursing Challenges in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Era
Jeung-Im Kim, Mi Yu
Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing.2021; 51(1): 1. CrossRef
Network of institutions, source journals, and keywords on COVID-19 by Korean authors based on the Web of Science Core Collection in January 2021
Kyung Won Kim, Geume Hee Jeong
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 47. CrossRef
The nature of rapid response to COVID-19 in Latin America: an examination of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico
Janaina Pamplona da Costa, André Luiz Sica de Campos, Paulo Roberto Cintra, Liz Felix Greco, Johan Hendrik Poker
Online Information Review.2021; 45(4): 729. CrossRef
Bibliometric Analysis of Scientific Production on Nursing Research in the Web of Science
Gregorio Jesús Alcalá-Albert, María Elena Parra-González
Education Sciences.2021; 11(9): 455. 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
Tracking the progress in COVID-19 and vaccine safety research – a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of publications indexed in Scopus database
Tosin Yinka Akintunde, Shaojun Chen, Taha Hussein Musa, Felix Oluseyi Amoo, Adekunle Adedeji, Elhakim Ibrahim, Angwi Enow Tassang, Idriss Hussein Musa, Hassan Hussein Musa
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics.2021; 17(11): 3887. CrossRef
Visibility, collaboration and impact of the Cuban scientific output on COVID-19 in Scopus
Ibraín Enrique Corrales-Reyes, Frank Hernández-García, Adrián Alejandro Vitón-Castillo, Christian R. Mejia
Heliyon.2021; : e08258. CrossRef
A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF GREEN PRODUCTIVITY CONCEPT
Erdinc KOC, Ahmed İhsan ŞİMŞEK
İşletme Bilimi Dergisi.2021; 9(3): 393. CrossRef
The research on COVID-19 and economy from 2019 to 2020: analysis from the perspective of bibliometrics
Nana Liu, Zeshui Xu, Marinko Skare
Oeconomia Copernicana.2021; 12(2): 217. CrossRef
COVID-19 and publishing
Kihong Kim
Science Editing.2020; 7(2): 109. 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

Reviews

History of the Scopus Expert Content Selection and Advisory Committee of Korea: Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(1):6-10. Published online February 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.183

5,738 View
121 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Abstract PDF

With the objective of improving the quality of Korean journals and elevating them to international standards, the National Research Foundation of Korea, in consultation with Elsevier, formed the Scopus Expert Content Selection and Advisory Committee-Korea (ECSAC-Korea) as a local selection committee in August 2012. The committee reviews Korean journals for Scopus indexing and recommends them to the Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board. In September 2019, ECSAC-Korea became part of the Korean Council of Science Editors (KCSE). This article describes the current status of Scopus indexing in Korea and the history, organizational structure, and role of ECSAC-Korea as part of the KCSE. The article also introduces the members of ECSAC-Korea and the KCSE steering committee for Scopus ECSAC-Korea, who have been active since September 2019.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Role of academic publishers in 10 years: a perspective from the Chairman of Elsevier
Youngsuk Chi
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 46. CrossRef
Presidential address: How to cope with the present environment of scholarly journal publishing
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 1. CrossRef

Overview of disciplinary data sharing practices and promotion of open data in science: Jihyun Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(1):3-9. Published online February 20, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.149

6,512 View
206 Download
8 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

The present study specifies the historical development of data sharing practices in three disciplines—oceanography, ecology, and genomics—along with the evolving progress of movements—e-Science, cyberinfrastructure, and open science—that expedite data sharing in more diverse disciplines. The review of these disciplinary data-sharing practices and the movements suggests opportunities and challenges that would serve as a basis for implementing data-sharing practices. The increasing need for large-scale and interdisciplinary research provides momentum for initiating data sharing. In addition, the development of data repositories and standards for metadata and data format facilitates data sharing. However, challenges need to be addressed, in regard to conflicting issues of patenting data, concerns about privacy and confidentiality, and informed consent that adequately enables data sharing. It is also necessary to consider the needs of the various stakeholders involved in data sharing to incentivize them to improve its impact.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Korean scholarly journal editors’ and publishers’ attitudes towards journal data sharing policies and data papers (2023): a survey-based descriptive study
Hyun Jun Yi, Youngim Jung, Hyekyong Hwang, Sung-Nam Cho
Science Editing.2023; 10(2): 141. CrossRef
Deep learning-empowered crop breeding: intelligent, efficient and promising
Xiaoding Wang, Haitao Zeng, Limei Lin, Yanze Huang, Hui Lin, Youxiong Que
Frontiers in Plant Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Corporate Data Sharing, Leakage, and Supervision Mechanism Research
Haifei Yu, Xinyu He
Sustainability.2021; 13(2): 931. CrossRef
Scientific Cooperation: Supporting Circumpolar Permafrost Monitoring and Data Sharing
Troy J. Bouffard, Ekaterina Uryupova, Klaus Dodds, Vladimir E. Romanovsky, Alec P. Bennett, Dmitry Streletskiy
Land.2021; 10(6): 590. CrossRef
Understanding Research Data Repositories as Infrastructures
Ceilyn Boyd
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2021; 58(1): 25. CrossRef
Bringing Code to Data: Do Not Forget Governance
Christine Suver, Adrian Thorogood, Megan Doerr, John Wilbanks, Bartha Knoppers
Journal of Medical Internet Research.2020; 22(7): e18087. 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

Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information: Jeong-Wook Seo, Hosik Chung, Tae-Sul Seo, Youngim Jung, Eun Seong Hwang, Cheol-Heui Yun, Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2017;4(2):58-69. Published online August 16, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.97; Correction in: Sci Ed 2018;5(2):171

17,507 View
232 Download
6 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF

The current statistic data on the open access (OA) journals and institutional repositories show some successes and increased awareness on OA in Asian countries. There are several concerns, however, in regards to the access and use of articles by researchers together with the continued increase of libraries’ expenditure for journals. In the present article we introduce five solutions in the global and local perspectives. OA2020 initiative is a global initiative to transform existing journals to OA. Although the practical process of OA2020 remains a challenge, the transformation will increase OA without significant increase of journals and budgets for publishing. The promotion of the local and Asian journals is the second big challenge. Because these local or Asian journals still have important roles in the local research community, they should keep current publishing model of OA at the low cost but with high quality and the better access. The restructuring of the current library budget is the third challenge. The budget for periodicals should be reduced and the saved budget can be used to pay articles processing charge for OA and for purchasing monographs. The fourth important issue is ‘the digital blind spot at the young unemployed and retired elderly’. These groups of poorly supported and potentially important researchers have to be considered as a priority issue to the policies on OA and scholarly knowledge. Lastly, we believe there should be different needs for other activities: optimization of the searchable database, governmental policy on open science and international cooperation on OA.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Changes in the absolute numbers and proportions of open access articles from 2000 to 2021 based on the Web of Science Core Collection: a bibliometric study
Jeong-Wook Seo
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 45. CrossRef
“I Am in a Privileged Situation”: Examining the Factors Promoting Inequity in Open Access Publishing
Philips Ayeni
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2023; 60(1): 521. CrossRef
El acceso al conocimiento un derecho universal: las implicaciones sobre la gobernanza de ecosistemas de acceso abierto
Wilson López López
Universitas Psychologica.2019; 18(5): 1. CrossRef
Journal metrics of Clinical and Molecular Hepatology based on the Web of Science Core Collection
Sun Huh
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2018; 24(2): 137. CrossRef
Why and how do we keep editing local medical journals in an era of information overload?
Viera Wardhani, Sam Mathew, Jeong-Wook Seo, Komang G. Wiryawan, Vivi Setiawaty, Burmaajav Badrakh
Science Editing.2018; 5(2): 150. CrossRef
Recent advances of medical journals in Korea and and further development strategies: Is it possible for them to publish Nobel Prize-winning research?
Sun Huh
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2018; 61(9): 524. CrossRef

Original Article

Increased number of papers co-authored by professor and his students in humanities and social sciences journals published in Korea: Rae Seong Hong, Eun Seong Hwang; Sci Ed. 2017;4(1):12-17. Published online February 20, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.83

9,337 View
179 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Humanities and social sciences studies in Korea have remarkably low rates of co-authorship between professors and students. We chose a bibliometrics-based approach to characterize changes in the ratio of joint authorship between professors and students. Articles classified in the humanities and social sciences sectors that were published in journals registered in the Korean Citation Index during 2 phases over a 10-year period—2004 to 2006 (phase 1) and 2011 to 2013 (phase 2)—were used as the main source for the analysis. The study results can be summarized as follows: first, the overall number of co-authored articles drastically increased from phase 1 to phase 2; the percentage of co-authorship articles increased from 34.8% to 47.7%, and the percentage of co-authorship between students and professors rose from 9.9% to 20.7%. This trend was particularly noticeable in the social sciences, such as accounting, social welfare, and economics/business administration. Second, papers written by scholars from Seoul National University, Yonsei University, and Korea University were often published in high-impact factor journals. Among those articles, the rate of professor-student co-authorship increased by 21.6% for 7 years. Third, the increase in professor-student co-authored articles published in high- impact factor journals was even sharper. These findings indicate that perceptions of professor-student co-authorship have changed in the humanities and social sciences. In the near future, positive perceptions toward joint research and joint authorship between professors and students are expected to become more widespread.

Case Study

Taiwan Government’s scientific journal supporting policy: Hsiu-Ching Hsu, Wei-Hsing Tuan; Sci Ed. 2016;3(2):105-108. Published online August 20, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.74

10,503 View
157 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This report discloses the journal supporting policy in Taiwan. At the moment, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) not only gives financial support to each academic research projects but also plays an important role to the quality of many scientific journals. The MOST has established a competitive evaluation system to assess the quality of scientific journals. According to the policy of MOST, each academic association could apply financial support for one scientific journal. Around 60 journals receive support from MOST every year.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Knowledge production and internationalisation of research in Taiwan: a new watershed?
Sheng-Ju Chan, Chia-Yu Yang, Hung-Chun Tai
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management.2020; 42(2): 245. CrossRef

Original Articles

Increasing number of authors per paper in Korean science and technology papers: Hyunju Jang, Kihong Kim, Sun Huh, Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2016;3(2):80-89. Published online August 20, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.70

13,110 View
204 Download
3 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Abstract PDF

We examined changes in the number of authors per paper for science and technology papers (agricultural sciences, engineering and technologies, medical sciences, and natural sciences) in Korea. We employed the Scopus database to examine the change in the number of authors in papers, which were published from 2000 to 2015 in the 234 Korean academic journals indexed on Scopus. We found that the global trend of growth in the number of authors per paper is evident in Korea as well. While there was little evidence of a correlation with the citation per paper, a positive correlation was found between with the field-weighted citation impact, another measure of a paper’s impact, in medical and natural science papers. In terms of the type of collaboration, we found that international collaboration papers had the highest number of authors, followed by national and institutional collaborations. The number of authors per paper was highest for those published in the top 10% journals by Source Normalized Impact per Paper, followed by Scopus-indexed journals, while papers published in Korea Citation Index had the lowest number of authors per paper. We propose that the rise in the number of authors per paper in Korean papers may be ascribed to many Korean research programs encouraging group research and the widespread availability of the internet, which has stimulated joint research efforts and encouraged international collaboration.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Analysis of Research Performance and Trends in Environmental Science
Won-Gi Shin, Moon-Ki Park, Da-Hyeon Kim, Hyun-Ju Jang, Tae-Sun Min
Journal of Environmental Science International.2020; 29(3): 283. CrossRef
Already, But Not Yet: Ending Unethical Practices in Authorship
Young-Chul Jung
Psychiatry Investigation.2018; 15(4): 335. CrossRef
Comparison between Korean and foreign authors concerning the citation impact of Korean journals indexed in Scopus
Hyunju Jang, Ki Woo Chun, Hyungsun Kim
Science Editing.2018; 6(1): 47. CrossRef
Rapid growth of international collaboration from articles indexed in Scopus database by researchers in Korea from 2006 to 2015
Yeonok Chung, Kihong Kim
Science Editing.2017; 4(1): 18. CrossRef

Analysis of journal attributes of 403 KoreaScience journals from the viewpoint of author: Sung-Nam Cho, Tae-Sul Seo, Hee-Yoon Choi, Sun-A Park; Sci Ed. 2016;3(1):19-25. Published online February 19, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.58

13,374 View
132 Download
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Korea is a country in which journal industry is rapidly increasing recently. KoreaScience is a typical Korean scientific and technical journal database that may be used to analyze Korean journals. A set of journal attributes reflecting the requirements in view of submitting authors was derived and some characteristics of KoreaScience journals such as subject distribution, launch year, publication frequency, publication language, and open access were quantitatively analyzed according to the journal attributes. As a result, it was found that Korean journals are published in almost all subject categories except some subject categories under Physics. The number of journal has been increased rapidly during the period between 1980s and 1990s. Journals published quarterly are 45%. Journals published in English are 31%. Open access journals are 26% while 72% free access.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Study on Development of Journal and Article Visualization Services
Sung-Nam Cho, Tae-Sul Seo
Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science.2016; 50(2): 183. CrossRef

Topics of major current interest in scholarly editing and publishing based on the content analysis of selected journals: Yeonok Chung; Sci Ed. 2015;2(2):59-62. Published online August 14, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.45

15,899 View
104 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

For the purpose of obtaining a concrete picture of the main issues related to modern scholarly editing and publishing, a content analysis of the recent issues of three international journals devoted to scholarly editing and publishing, which are Learned Publishing, Journal of Scholarly Publishing, and European Science Editing, has been performed. The main topics in each of the 273 articles published in those journals over recent three years have been identified and classified into broad categories. The result has shown that the two most popular topics are open access publishing and peer review process. Other non-traditional topics currently receiving a great attention include bibliometrics, publication ethics, information technology applicable to editing and publishing, digital publishing, and literature databases. In order to keep up with the rapidly-developing field of scholarly editing and publishing and develop a local journal into an international journal of a high standard, it is important to remain keen to the latest development related to these topics.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Forecast of the Development of Russian Scientific Journals: The Publishers
O. V. Moskaleva, M. A. Akoev
Scholarly Research and Information.2020; 3(2-3): 131. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 2
Next
Last

Search