JournalTOCs

European Science Editing
Number of Followers: 1

This is an Open Access Journal

Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0258-3127 - ISSN (Online) 2518-3354
Published by European Association of Science Editors

[1 journal]

Gender differences in time taken for peer review and publishing output in
the physical sciences
- Abstract: European Science Editing 49: e78084
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2023.e78084
  Authors : Emma C. Leedham Elvidge : Background: Despite decades of work to improve gender equality in science (and other science, technology, engineering, and maths fields), gender bias still exists and has been shown to impact the retention of women in academic scientific careers. Publication of peer-reviewed articles remains a key criterion for career progression and a common marker of success in academia. Any barriers to publication faced by women may therefore impact their retention and career progression.Objectives: To investigate gender differences within one potential barrier to publication, namely the time taken in peer review, by investigating the question: ‘Is the peer review process longer for papers with (assumed) women as first authors than those with (assumed) male first authors'’Methods: Gender differences in peer review time were analysed for 1100 peer-reviewed papers published between 2006 and 2016 and selected from 5 journals covering a range of physical science disciplines and publication styles.Results: In the physical sciences, male first-authored papers outnumbered female first-authored papers 2:1. However, the analysis showed no statistical difference in the time taken for peer review between the two sets of papers.Conclusion: The time taken to peer review a paper is not linked to the gender of the paper’s first author. However, the large discrepancy in the number of papers with men as first authors compared to that with women as first authors could be a contributing factor to the attrition of women from the academic career ladder (the so-called ‘leaky pipeline’). HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:00:00 +020
Artistic licence: artwork permission practices at The Lancet group
- Abstract: European Science Editing 49: e96778
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2023.e96778
  Authors : Danielle S. Gash, Christopher H. Wortley : Artwork within publications, broadly covering non-text items including graphs, diagrams, and photographs, is typically published under a copyright licence, and permission for the reproduction of such items needs to be sought. The various image rights can be difficult to navigate, especially in the era of open access, and thus at The Lancet, we have developed a streamlined workflow to guide our teams on artwork permission processes in our journals. We present a practical guide for other publishing professionals, which can be adapted to meet their resources and needs. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 08:00:00 +020
Why the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions asks
authors to include the country name in the title
- Abstract: European Science Editing 49: e99231
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2023.e99231
  Authors : Sun Huh : None HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:30:00 +0200
Where did this come from' When (not how) to cite sources in scientific
publications
- Abstract: European Science Editing 49: e94153
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2023.e94153
  Authors : Thomas A. Lang : In the scientific literature, the link between an idea and its source is its reference information that allows the source to be identified and located. Not so obvious is where the source is cited in the text. Although authors are given extensive details on how to format references, they are not always taught when to cite them. Further, many are not vigilant in confirming the accuracy of the quoted information against the source or in verifying the associated reference information. In fact, discrepancies between the information cited in the text and the information actually presented in the source are common and often serious. Further, inaccuracies in references that break the link between the citation and its source are even more common. These discrepancies and inaccuracies affect the integrity of science and the validity of the citation metrics (for example, the Journal Impact Factor) that are used, rightly or wrongly, to evaluate the importance of journals and authors. Here, I discuss factors affecting when and where sources should be cited. I also consider factors that can bias the selection of sources and so interfere with the validity of citation analyses, review some considerations for evaluating a source, call attention to citation and quotation error rates, and review some strategies for reducing these errors. Finally, I summarise the most common recommendations for when, what, where, and why sources should or should not be cited. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:30:00 +0200
Reducing the risk of bias in academic publishing
- Abstract: European Science Editing 49: e90942
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2023.e90942
  Authors : Nguyen Hoang Thien : The risk of bias in academic publishing is present from the first stages of the publishing process when the author creates an account and submits the manuscript, which becomes subject to the rights and power of journal editors. The author’s disclosure of certain personal information risks exposing him/her to biases for or against certain groups of authors. To reduce these potential biases, reviewers and editors involved in the assessment of author works should be prevented from accessing authors’ information until the final decision regarding publication has been made. Some information, such as authors’ ORCID details, can be requested after the article is accepted for publication. Standardizing appeal procedures and establishing protocols for handling author appeals is a necessary step in the effort to reduce publication bias. Regulations for the cover letter to editor should also be put in place to ensure that authors’ personal information is not disclosed, either explicitly or implicitly. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 10:00:00 +020
Gender balance and geographical diversity in editorial boards of
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta and Chemical Geology
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e89470
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e89470
  Authors : Olivier Pourret, Pallavi Anand, Pieter Bots, Elizabeth Cottrell, Anthony Dosseto, Ashley Gunter, David W. Hedding, Daniel Enrique Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Karen Johannesson, Jabrane Labidi, Susan Little, Haiyan Liu, Tebogo Vincent Makhubela, Johanna Marin Carbonne, Alida Perez-Fodich, Amy Riches, Romain Tartèse, Aradhna Tripati : Background: Members of editorial boards of academic journals are often considered gatekeepers of knowledge and role models for the academic community. Editorial boards should be sufficiently diverse in the background of their members to facilitate publishing manuscripts representing a wide range of research paradigms, methods, and cultural perspectives.Objectives: To critically evaluate changes in the representation of binary gender and geographic diversity over time on the editorial boards of Chemical Geology and Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, flagship geochemistry journals, respectively, from the European Association of Geochemistry and the Geochemical Society – Meteoritical Society partnership.Methods: The composition of editorial boards was ascertained as given in the first issue of each year, over 1965–2021 for Chemical Geology and 1950–2021 for Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, and members of the editorial boards were coded for their country of affiliation (the country of origin may have been different) and for their binary gender.Results: Gender parity, limited to men and women, and the number of countries of affiliation increased steadily between the late 1980s and 2021. However, the geographic distribution remained dominated by affiliations from North America and Western Europe. The editor-in-chief or board of editors had a significant impact on the diversity of the editorial boards, and both geographic and gender diversity may evolve with nearly every newly appointed editor. However, the persistently substantial under-representation on editorial boards of affiliations outside North America and Europe is of concern and needs to be the focus of active recruitment and ongoing monitoring. This approach will ensure that traditionally low geographic diversity is increased and maintained in the future.Conclusion: Improving diversity and inclusion of editorial boards of academic journals and strengthening journal and disciplinary reputations are mutually reinforcing. Instituting a rotating editorship with emphasis on embedding broader geographic networks and more equitable international recruitment could ensure sustained and wider geographic representation and gender balance of editorial boards and promote originality and quality of published research, representing our global communities. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 08:00:00 +020
Should editors with multiple retractions or a record of academic
misconduct serve on journal editorial boards'
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e95926
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e95926
  Authors : Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva : In the academic world, despite their corrective nature, there is still a negative stigma attached to retractions, even more so if they are based on ethical infractions. Editors-in-chief and editors are role models in academic and scholarly communities. Thus, if they have multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct, this viewpoint argues that they should not serve on journals’ editorial boards. The exception is where such individuals have displayed a clear path of scholarly reform. Policy and guidance is needed by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 07:35:00 +020
Should editors-in-chief publish in their own journals' ‘Publish
elsewhere’ is not a solution
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e90552
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e90552
  Authors : Salim Moussa : The question of should editors-in-chief (EICs) publish in their own journals has been hotly debated in academic spheres. Some authors have recommended that EICs should refrain from publishing articles in their own journals. They advocate for a ‘publish elsewhere’ solution. For EICs and journals, a ‘publish elsewhere’ solution is unjust, unfair, inadequate, and counterproductive. For manuscripts (co) authored by EICs, an alternative solution is to use an open peer review procedure in which reviewers’ comments are made public alongside EICs/authors’ responses. An open peer review procedure should make the submission and acceptance dates, the number of revision rounds that EICs’ articles went through, and the identities of handling editors available to readers and the general public. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:00:00 +020
Publications on COVID-19 from Vietnam during 2020 and 2021: A
bibliometric analysis
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e83724
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e83724
  Authors : Van Luong Nguyen, Dinh-Hai Luong, Hiep-Hung Pham : Background: Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, published research from Vietnam related to the pandemic was analysed using bibliometrics.Objectives: To examine the status of research on COVID-19 by authors from Vietnam.Methods: The following bibliometric aspects were considered in the analysis: international collaboration, institutions from Vietnam and their partner institutions worldwide, subjects and topics, types of documents, and individual authors. The basis of the study was data obtained from the Scopus database between 2020 and 2021. The data were analysed using Microsoft Excel, R, and VOSviewer, and the emerging trends illustrated through descriptive analysis and science mapping. Results: Between 2020 and 2021, researchers from Vietnam co-authored 1034 documents related to COVID-19, amounting to 0.35% of the total of 296,148 such documents published worldwide as ascertained from the Scopus database. Vietnam’s top country collaborators in that research were USA, Australia, the United Kingdom, India, and Taiwan ROC. The top Vietnam institutions were Duy Tan University, Ton Duc Thang University, and the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City. The research from Vietnam covered many subjects, from medicine and natural sciences to social sciences and economics. Eight clusters of topics related to COVID-19 were identified. In terms of citations, the most highly cited documents were the outcome of collaboration with international authors. Lastly, the study ranked top authors based on either the number of publications or the number of citations. Conclusion: This study provides a preliminary picture of studies related to COVID-19 co-authored by researchers in Vietnam. The picture may help the Vietnam government in devising appropriate strategies for post-COVID-19 restoration of the country’s socio-economic status. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 09:00:00 +0200
How editors can help authors write better papers: Beyond journals and
articles
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e95247
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e95247
  Authors : Ana Marusic, Matko Marusic : We present the experience of journal editors in improving the quality of published papers. As the editors of the Croatian Medical Journal, a journal from the so-called scientific periphery, we realized, very early after the start of the journal in 1991, that our authors needed significant assistance with their articles. We worked individually with journal authors and then moved this activity to the next stage – intensive workshops for authors. The work with the journals enabled us to extend these activities to graduate and postgraduate students – future authors. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:00:00 +020
Scientific abstracts: Texts, contexts, and subtexts
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e85616
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e85616
  Authors : Thomas A. Lang : In their 4000-year history, abstracts have taken several forms and represented a variety of documents. The scientific journal emerged in the 1600s and gave rise to what would become the modern scientific abstract. Here, I describe the contexts in which abstracts evolved, address the subtexts of opinions about their purpose, and review the texts of 12 kinds of abstracts. For most readers, articles do not exist beyond abstracts. However, the quality of abstracts is often poor. Inaccuracies are common, serious, widespread, and long-standing. s should inform only the choice of what to read and never what to do. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 09:00:00 +020
Country information in titles – equality or equity
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e89445
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e89445
  Authors : Kate Wilson : HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 10:00:00 +030
The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines: Implementation
and checklist development
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e86910
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e86910
  Authors : Heather Van Epps, Olaya Astudillo, Yaiza Del Pozo Martin, Joan Marsh : Understanding sex and gender differences is fundamental to rigorous and inclusive research, whether studying disease pathophysiology, sociodemographic determinants of health, or the benefits and harms of medical or social interventions. The inclusion of gender-diverse study populations has improved, but the reporting of sex and gender variables in research is still incomplete. The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines, published in 2016, have been widely endorsed, but few scientific journals and organizations have incorporated them into formal editorial guidance and publication policies. To facilitate monitoring of and adherence to the SAGER guidelines in Lancet journals, we carried out an informal pilot study and developed a checklist to enable rapid editorial checks, promote uptake of the guidelines by other editors and journals, and raise awareness among peer reviewers and authors. By using this checklist as part of manuscript assessment and peer-review processes, journal editors can support best reporting practices when considering sex and gender as variables, improving the generalizability of the research they publish. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 09:00:00 +0300
Anonymity in anonymized peer review is incompatible with preprints
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e91290
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e91290
  Authors : Jaime Teixeira da Silva : HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 19:00:00 +0300
Equity in reporting settings of studies
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e87545
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e87545
  Authors : Duleeka Knipe, Rachel Jewkes : HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:00:00 +0300
Stop paying to be published Open Access - a French perspective
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e90113
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e90113
  Authors : Olivier Pourret : Commentary on open access HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:25:00 +030
How much do Romanian medical students know about research ethics' A
survey
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e76261
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e76261
  Authors : Octavian Andronic, Alexandra Bolocan, Dan Nicolae Păduraru, Daniel Ion, Florentina Musat : Background: Although scientific research in Romania has continued to expand over the past 20 years, it is unclear how prepared the country’s students are to be involved in research and to publish the results of their work.Objectives: To assess Romanian medical students’ level of knowledge about research integrity and research ethics.Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 187 medical students (of which 70% were women) from Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania, was performed between September 2017 and June 2018. The survey consisted of self-evaluation with respect to three aspects, namely knowledge of research in general, that of research integrity, and that of publication integrity. The self-evaluation was followed by a set of 17 questions that tested the respondent’s knowledge.Results: On average, the proportion of correct answers was 34% (range, 12%–65%). Whereas those who had assigned low grades to themselves (a score below 5) fared poorly (fewer correct answers) in the test that followed, those who rated themselves highly (a score of 5 or higher) did not fare as well as they were expected to. The majority of respondents (83%) were willing to learn more about research integrity through courses, workshops, training programmes, etc.Conclusion: The respondents showed a low level of knowledge related to both research integrity and current standards of reporting scientific research. This lacuna demonstrates the need to train students at the beginning of their academic life because more and more of them, both undergraduate and postgraduate, are likely to be involved in scientific research. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 09:30:00 +030
Trends in the proportion of women as reviewers, editors, and editorial
board members of 15 North American and British medical journals from 2014
to 2019: A retrospective study
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e80709
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e80709
  Authors : Roxanna Wang, Robin Roberts, James C Fredenburgh, Mary Cushman, Jeffrey I Weitz : Background and objective: There is persistent men-dominated gender disparity in medical academia. Predominance of men in the editorial makeup of medical journals might contribute to this inequity. This retrospective study (2014–2019)sought to evaluate gender representation in reviewers, editors, and members of the editorial boards in 15 leading medical journals from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.Methods: We surveyed lists of reviewers, editors, and editorial board members from seven journals of internal medicine, a specialty dominated by men; three journals of obstetrics and gynaecology and two of paediatrics, specialties dominated by women; and three journals of psychiatry, a gender-balanced specialty. Information from publicly available resources was used to infer gender, and the percentages of women were calculated. Trends over time were characterized by changes in these percentages from year to year through the linear regression line fitted to the data for each journal.Results: Journals of women-dominated specialties had significantly higher proportions of women reviewers than those of men-dominated or gender-balanced specialties, with mean percentages (95% confidence interval) of 45.8% (40.5%–51.1%), 28.0% (22.3%–33.7%), and 33.8% (27.6%–40.1%), respectively (p
  PubDate: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 11:00:00 +0300
CiteScores of cardiology and cardiovascular journals indexed in Scopus in
2019: A bibliometric analysis
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e73949
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e73949
  Authors : Zahra Zolfaghari, Nasrin Shokrpour, Leila Ghahramani, Pooneh Sarveravan : Background: Citations are considered a measure of the scientific impact of research articles. CiteScore is a standard metric, based on the Scopus database, of the number of times articles in a given journal were cited during a given period relative to the number of articles published by that journal during that period.Objectives: To investigate the factors associated with CiteScores of journals on cardiology and cardiovascular diseases and indexed in Scopus in 2019.Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study examined 338 journals to analyse the correlation between CiteScore and such other variables and parameters as coverage by indexing services (databases), type of access, language, type of published articles, age of the journal (year of establishment), H-Index, Scimago Journal Rank, and the quartile of the journal.Results: CiteScore of a journal was positively correlated to the following variables or parameters: coverage by PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE (p < 0.001), articles in English (p < 0.001), age of the journal (p = 0.001), publishing review articles (p = 0.23), H-Index (p < 0.001), and Scimago Journal Rank (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Coverage of a journal in international databases, especially in PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE, is critical to increasing its visibility. Publishing review articles, which tend to be cited more often because they serve as comprehensive sources of information, can increase the CiteScore of a journal. Also, publishing more articles in English contributes to the number of times articles in a journal are cited. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 16:00:00 +0300
Style-free references rather than standardized citation styles
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e83943
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e83943
  Authors : Libor Ansorge : In this communication, the calls for standardizing citation styles are discussed. Instead of standardizing citation style, I consider efforts to introduce style-free references to be more beneficial to authors. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 09:00:00 +0300
Compliance of abstracts of randomized control trials with CONSORT
guidelines: A case study of Balkan journals
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e71240
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e71240
  Authors : Necdet Sut, Zafer Koçak, Selcuk Korkmaz, Cem Uzun : Background: Published reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not compliant with the CONSORT checklist as much as they should.Objective: To assess the quality, in terms of the level to which they are compliant with the CONSORT checklist, of abstracts of RCTs published in general medical journals in the Balkan region.Methods: Two observers assessed the abstracts of RCTs published in five general medical journals of the Balkan region between 2012 and 2018 to determine the level to which the abstracts were compliant with the 16-item CONSORT abstracts checklist.Results: Of the 183 studies that were identified for evaluation, 124 (67.8%) were excluded from the evaluation. The average compliance level was 44.5% (95% CI: 41.9%–47.1%), the lowest being that for randomization (1.7%), funding (1.7%),numbers analysed (11.0%), blinding (13.6%), and trial registration (18.6%). However, the compliance level was very high for conclusions (99.2%), objectives (96.6%), interventions (95.8%), and primary outcomes (83.9%). The length of the abstract (word count) and the level of compliance were positively correlated (rs = 0.43; p = 0.001). s of trials published in journals that endorse CONSORT in their publication policies were more compliant than those published in other journals (47.5 ± 10.4 versus 40.8 ± 8.0, p = 0.024).Conclusion: The overall level of compliance with the CONSORT checklist was below 50%. To improve the quality of abstracts of RCTs, authors should be encouraged to use the CONSORT checklist, and editors should check compliance with the CONSORT guidelines as part the publishing workflow. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 09:00:00 +0300
Needs of early-career professionals in STM: Findings from two surveys
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e79315
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e79315
  Authors : Erin Foley, Rachel Moriarty, Kerys Martin : Background: The Early Career Publishers Committee (ECPC) of the STM Association (the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers)’s Early Career Publishers Committee (ECPC) aims to engage, and provide tools and resources for, early-career publishers (ECPs) and professionals. The committee believes it is important to survey the community regularly to understand the background, needs, and concerns of its members to better achieve the committee’s goals.Objectives: Early-career professionals were surveyed in 2014 and 2020: the first survey was undertaken to get a baseline understanding of the community and to guide the newly formed ECPC whereas the second not only sought to review some aspects of the first survey but also to identify and explore ways to improve engagement and support through new or revised survey questions.Methods: The two surveys were conducted online through the ECPC mailing list and social networks. The surveys were voluntary, with the option to skip some questions, and responses – some in the form of a rating scale – were collected anonymously. Each survey remained open for over a month to maximize responses, but neither was pretested. Some questions in the first survey were revised in the second in the light of learnings from the first survey.Results: Most of respondents were women, 25–54 years old, from the UK or the US, with higher degrees, and working in editorial roles. In the second survey, many respondents were interested in developing their career either in their current role or in a different one, and nearly half were actively seeking a new role. Over half said that finding the right role was a challenge. Many had never participated in a publishing-related mentoring scheme, and most had not heard of the STM mentoring scheme before.Conclusions: More tools, resources, and outreach for entry-level and younger industry members, for those from countries outside the UK and US, and for those seeking to develop their careers may be useful in the future. The mentoring scheme could be publicized more prominently to drive engagement. A new survey will be needed in the next 2–3 years, given the potential impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic on the number of respondents in the second (2020) survey and their motivation. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 26 May 2022 09:00:00 +030
A model text recycling policy for publishers
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e81677
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e81677
  Authors : Cary Moskovitz, Michael Pemberton, Susanne Hall : Because science advances incrementally, scientists often need to repeat material included in their prior work when composing new texts. Such “text recycling” is a common but complex writing practice, so authors and editors need clear and consistent guidance about what constitutes appropriate practice. Unfortunately, publishers’ policies on text recycling to date have been incomplete, unclear, and sometimes internally inconsistent. Building on 4 years of research on text recycling in scientific writing, the Text Recycling Research Project has developed a model text recycling policy that should be widely applicable for research publications in scientific fields. This article lays out the challenges text recycling poses for editors and authors, describes key factors that were addressed in developing the policy, and explains the policy’s main features. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:00:00 +030
Academia's challenges in the face of the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e83864
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e83864
  Authors : Jaime Teixeira da Silva : The European Union (EU), and Europe more widely, is facing its largest socio-political threat in a generation. As the political events between Russia and Ukraine, which have been festering since at least 2014, have now turned into a war, with many major Western and EU companies barring business with Russia, and with most Western Governments imposing increasingly stiffer sanctions on Russia, where do non-Russian academic publishers stand' This commentary takes a brief look at what we know, and where we stand. A humanitarian response is needed, but so too is a decision regarding treatment of Russian and Ukrainian academics. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 10:00:00 +030
European Association of Science Editors statement in support of Ukraine
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e84992
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e84992
  Authors : Duncan Nicholas : The European Association of Science Editors statement on the invasion of Ukraine includes details of support for the Association's Ukrainian members and all peoples of Ukraine, condemnation of the Russian invasion, and advocacy for research and scholarly publishing industry initiatives to support continued academic activity. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 10:00:00 +030
Challenges of qualitative data sharing in social sciences
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e77781
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e77781
  Authors : Tanja Vuckovic Juros : Open science offers hope for new accountability and transparency in social sciences. Nevertheless, it still fails to fully consider the complexities of qualitative research, as exemplified by a reflection on sensitive qualitative data sharing. As a result, the developing patterns of rewards and sanctions promoting open science raise concern that quantitative research, whose “replication crisis” brought the open science movement to life, will benefit from “good science” re-evaluations at the expense of other research epistemologies, despite the necessity to define accountability and transparency in social sciences more widely and not to conflate those with either reproducibility or data sharing. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:30:00 +0300
Citation styles of references: a weakness of academic publishing
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e79945
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e79945
  Authors : Daniel Rozell : HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 09:00:00 +020
The new ICMJE disclosure form
- Abstract: European Science Editing 48: e76113
  DOI : 10.3897/ese.2022.e76113
  Authors : Christopher Baethge : Effective 30 June 2021, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, ICMJE, has updated its disclosure form. It is now public on ICMJE’s web page, and member journals have started using the form. In the ICMJE, editors of general medical journals discuss and adopt proposals to address important problems in medical publishing, such as authorship definition, trial registration, data sharing, and the declaration of conflict of interest. All of ICMJE’s proposals are summarized in the “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals”, a 19-page document containing advice on a wide variety of topics related to manuscript writing and publishing. HTML XML PDF
  PubDate: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:00:00 +0200