Updated Editorial Guidance for Quality and Reliability of Research Output

Gasparyan, Armen Yuri; Yessirkepov, Marlen; Voronov, Alexander A.; Koroleva, M. A.; Kitas, George D.

doi:10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e247

Cited by 29 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There may be a need for journals to come together and resolve to adhere to ethical principles of publishing practices akin to a recently published declaration by a group of European editors. 52 53 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrity of authorship and peer review practices are important considerations for ethical publishing. Criteria for authorship, as delineated in the guidelines by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), have undergone evolution over the decades, and now require fulfillment of four criteria, including the need to be able to take responsibility for all aspects of the manuscript in question. Although such updated authorship criteria were published nearly five years ago, still, many major medical and specialist journals have yet to revise their author instructions to conform to this. Inappropriate authorship practices may include gift, guest or ghost authorship. Existing literature suggests that such practices are still widely prevalent, especially in non-English speaking countries. Another emerging problem is that of peer review fraud, mostly by authors, but also rarely by handling editors. There is literature to suggest that a proportion of such fake peer review may be driven by the support of some unscrupulous external editing agencies. Such inappropriate practices with authorship malpractices or disagreement, or peer review fraud, have resulted in more than 600 retractions each, as identified on the retractions database of Retractionwatch.com. There is a need to generate greater awareness, especially in authors from non-English speaking regions of the world, about inappropriate authorship and unethical practices in peer review. Also, support of any external editing agency should be clearly disclosed by authors at the time of submission of a manuscript.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…KAMJE may be a role-model for other countries or societies, especially for developing countries, who want to improve the quality of their medical journals. KAMJE will guide the member journals continuously for updated or newly developed global editing and publishing as Gasparyan et al 8 introduced. Close synergistic cooperation between member journals within KAMJE and its successful achievements recall a famous African proverb, ‘If you want to go fast, you should go alone, but if you want to go far, you should go together.’…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of the Journal Evaluation Program of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE) on the Quality of the Member Journals

Yang

Hong

2018

J Korean Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn 1997 the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE) instituted a program to evaluate member journals. Journals that passed the initial evaluation were indexed in the KoreaMed. Here, we report changes in measures of quality of the KAMJE member journals during the last 20 years.MethodsQuality measures used in the study comprised 3 assessment categories; self-assessment by journal editors, assessment of the journals by KAMJE reviewers, and by Korean health science librarians. Each used detailed criteria to score the journals on a scale of 0 to 5 or 6 in multiple dimensions. We compared scores at baseline evaluation and those after 7 years for 129 journals and compared improvements in journals indexed vs. not-indexed by the Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded; SCIE).ResultsAmong 251 KAMJE member journals at the end of 2015, 227 passed evaluation criteria and 129 (56%) had both baseline and 7-year follow-up assessment data. The journals showed improvement overall (increase in median [interquartile range; IQR] score from baseline, 0.47 [0.64]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44–0.61; P < 0.001) and within each category (median [IQR] increase by editor's assessment, 0.17 [0.83]; 95% CI, 0.04–0.26; P = 0.007; by reviewer's, 0.45 [1.00]; 95% CI, 0.29–0.57; P < 0.001; by librarian's, 1.75 [1.08]; 95% CI, 1.77–2.18, P < 0.001). Before the foundation of KAMJE in 1996, there were only 5 Korean medical journals indexed in the MEDLINE and none in SCIE, but 24 journals in the MEDLINE and 34 journals in SCIE were indexed by 2016.ConclusionThe KAMJE journal evaluation program successfully contributes improving the quality of the member journals.

show abstract

“…The Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), which was launched in 2008, is a non-profit organization specifically representing interests of open-access publishers and standalone journals 100. The OASPA has strict membership criteria, which are similar to the DOAJ requirements to peer review, editorial practices, and archiving.…”

Section: Editorial Membershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Open Access Initiative is gaining momentum due to the worldwide availability of advanced digital tools, online publishing platforms, and systems for tracking academic contributions. Several declarations and initiatives, including Plan S, have already laid a foundation for moving away from subscription to full and immediate open-access publishing. The global initiatives imply targeting journals satisfying the upgraded quality and visibility criteria. To meet these criteria, a comprehensive approach to Open Access is recommended. This article overviews the essential components of the comprehensive approach, increasing transparency, adherence to ethical standards, and diversification of evaluation metrics. With the increasing volume of quality open-access journals, their indexing with free databases and search engines is becoming increasingly important. The Directory of Open Access Journals and PubMed Central currently free searches of open-access sources. These services, however, cannot fully satisfy the increasing demands of the users, and attempts are underway to upgrade the indexing and archiving of open-access sources in China, Japan, Korea, Russia, and elsewhere. The wide use of identifiers is essential for transparency of scholarly communications. Peer reviewers are now offered credits from Publons. These credits are transferrable to their Open Researcher and Contributor iDs. Various social media channels are increasingly used by scholars to comment on articles. All these comments are tracked by related metric systems, such as Altmetrics. Combined with traditional citation evaluations, the alternative metrics can help timely identify and promote publications influencing education, research, and practice.

show abstract

Updated Editorial Guidance for Quality and Reliability of Research Output

Cited by 29 publications

References 49 publications

Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

Impacts of the Journal Evaluation Program of the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE) on the Quality of the Member Journals

Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About