Access to Information ; Biomedical Research ; Editorial Policies ; Ethics, Research ; Humans ; Internet ; Journal Impact Factor ; Open Access Publishing ; Peer Review ; Periodicals as Topic ; Singapore

Our study aimed to amplify and explain the items of statistical reporting requirements proposed by medical journals, and to improve the statistical reporting quality of medical articles. Statistical reporting requirements were obtained from the reporting standards published by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) network, and the editorial board of Chinese Medical Journal, etc. The items involved in statistical reporting requirements were summarized as issues of study design, statistical analysis, and interpretation of results. Each item was amplified based on cases of original articles. It is noticeable that the statistical reporting requirements of English medical journals generally referring to guidance documents, including "Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals" proposed by the ICMJE, or the statements for different study types published by the EQUATOR network, where the statistical reporting of medical articles had been detailed specified. The statistical reporting requirements of Chinese medical journals, however, were usually stated by the editorial boards. Although the formats and contents of statistical analysis had been regulated, the requirements of Chinese medical journals were to some extent insufficient and should be enhanced in accordance with the international standards. In conclusion, the amplification and explanation of statistical reporting requirements were expected to help investigators understand the requirements for statistical reporting in medical researches, so as to effectively improve the quality of medical articles.
Biomedical Research ; Editorial Policies ; Humans ; Periodicals as Topic/standards* ; Publishing/standards* ; Reference Standards ; Research Design

No abstract available.
Adolescent Psychiatry ; Child ; Child Psychiatry* ; Databases, Bibliographic ; Editorial Policies ; Goals ; Periodicals as Topic* ; Publishing*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Eight years have passed since Clinical and Molecular Hepatology changed its language policy to English-only in September 2010. The journal has been included in PubMed Central since September 2010. Present title continues the Korean Journal of Hepatology since June 2012. It has been indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection as an Emerging Sources Citation Index journal since 2015. I sought to determine whether the change in language policy was successful based on journal metrics. I also investigated whether the journal has become one of the top-ranked world journals in the category of gastroenterology and hepatology. METHODS: The following journal metrics were calculated or analyzed based on the journal’s bibliographic information from 2012 to 2017 and the Web of Science Core Collection database: citable and non-citable articles, country of authors, total cites, impact factor, the immediacy index, country of citing authors, citing journal titles, and the Hirsch index. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2017, there were 282 citable articles. Authors from 29 countries have published in the journal. The number of total citations in 2017 was 611. The impact factor increased from 2.1 in 2014 to 2.8 in 2017. The citing authors were from 85 countries, and their papers have been cited in 663 journals. The Hirsch index was 19. CONCLUSIONS: Based on journal metrics, Clinical and Molecular Hepatology has succeeded in becoming a top-ranked international journal 8 years after changing its language policy to English-only.
Bibliometrics ; Editorial Policies ; Gastroenterology* ; Open Access Publishing

Over the past few years, updated editorial policy statements of several associations have provided a platform for improving the quality of scientific research and publishing. The updates have particularly pointed to the need for following research reporting standards, authorship and contributorship regulations, implementing digital tools for the identification and crediting academic contributors, and moving towards optimal ethical open-access models. This article overviews some of the recent editorial policy statements of global editorial associations and reflects on the role of the regional counterparts in advancing scholarly publishing. One of the globally promoted documents is the Recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Its latest versions contain statements on proper research reporting, reviewing, editing, and publishing. Points on ethical target journals and ‘predatory’ sources are also available. This year, in a move to update its editorial policy, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) released the Core Practices, comprehensively reflecting on the major issues in publication ethics. Updated joint statements of medical writers associations are also available to implement transparent policy on contributorship in sponsor-supported research projects and related reports. Several suggestions are put forward to improve global editorial statements on online profiling, crediting, and referencing. It is also highlighted that knowledge and implementation of updated editorial guidance is essential for editors' good standing.
Authorship ; Editorial Policies ; Ethics ; Information Storage and Retrieval ; Joints ; Medical Writing ; Periodicals as Topic ; Publications ; Quality Control ; Research Report ; Social Control, Formal

No abstract available.
Dental Implantation ; Dental Implants ; Editorial Policies ; Periodicals as Topic ; Periodontal Diseases

In the present study, the frequency of research misconduct in Korean medical papers was analyzed using the similarity check software iThenticate®. All Korean papers written in English that were published in 2009 and 2014 in KoreaMed Synapse were identified. In total, 23,848 papers were extracted. 4,050 original articles of them were randomly selected for similarity analysis. The average Similarity Index of the 4,050 papers decreased over time, particularly in 2013: in 2009 and 2014, it was 10.15% and 5.62%, respectively. And 357 (8.8%) had a Similarity Index of ≥ 20%. Authors considered a Similarity Index of ≥ 20% as suspected research misconduct. It was found that iThenticate® cannot functionally process citations without double quotation marks. Papers with a Similarity Index of ≥ 20% were thus individually checked for detecting such text-matching errors to accurately identify papers with suspected research misconduct. After correcting text-matching errors, 142 (3.5% of the 4,050 papers) were suspected of research misconduct. The annual frequency of these papers decreased over time, particularly in 2013: in 2009 and 2014, it was 5.2% and 1.7%, respectively. The decrease was associated with the introduction of CrossCheck by KoreaMed and the frequent use of similarity check software. The majority (81%) had Similarity Indices between 20% and 40%. The fact suggested that low Similarity index does not necessarily mean low possibility of research misconduct. It should be noted that, although iThenticate® provides a fundamental basis for detecting research misconduct, the final judgment should be made by experts.
Duplicate Publication as Topic ; Editorial Policies ; Ethics* ; Judgment ; Periodicals as Topic ; Plagiarism ; Publications* ; Scientific Misconduct ; Synapses

No abstract available.
Journalism, Medical* ; Peer Review, Research ; Publishing* ; Periodicals as Topic ; Editorial Policies ; Databases, Bibliographic

No abstract available.
Authorship ; Editorial Policies ; Peer Review/ethics ; Publishing/ethics* ; Scientific Misconduct ; Periodicals as Topic

Editorial Policies ; Humans ; Internet ; Organizational Objectives ; Peer Review, Research ; Periodicals as Topic ; Singapore