Group-level differences in publication patterns comparing students in transdisciplinary (TD) and traditional doctoral programs at year five of the TD programa.

In this work, I evaluate the impact of species distribution models (SDMs) on the current status of environmental and ecological journals by asking the question to which degree development of SDMs in the literature is related to recent changes in the impact factors of ecological journals. The hypothesis evaluated states that research fronts are likely to attract research attention and potentially drive citation patterns, with journals concentrating papers related to the research front receiving more attention and benefiting from faster increases in their impact on the ecological literature. My results indicate a positive relationship between the number of SDM related articles published in a journal and its impact factor (IF) growth during the period 2000–09. However, the percentage of SDM related papers in a journal was strongly and positively associated with the percentage of papers on climate change and statistical issues. The results support the hypothesis that global change science has been critical in the development of SDMs and that interest in climate change research in particular, rather than the usage of SDM per se, appears as an important factor behind journal IF increases in ecology and environmental sciences. Finally, our results on SDM application in global change science support the view that scientific interest rather than methodological fashion appears to be the major driver of research attraction in the scientific literature.

Raw data of data sharing policies in over 300 journals, supporting the article currently under review: "Reproducible and reusable research: Are journal data sharing policies meeting the mark?".

Raw data and analysis of data sharing policies of 318 biomedical journals. The study authors manually reviewed the author instructions and editorial policies to analyze the each journal's data sharing requirements and characteristics. The data sharing policies were ranked using a rubric to determine if data sharing was required, recommended, or not addressed at all. The data sharing method and licensing recommendations were examined, as well any mention of reproducibility or similar concepts. The data was analyzed for patterns relating to publishing volume, Journal Impact Factor, and the publishing model (open access or subscription) of each journal.

We evaluated journals included in Thomson Reuter’s InCites 2013 Journal Citations Reports (JCR) classified within the following World of Science schema categories: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Biology, Cell Biology, Crystallography, Developmental Biology, Biomedical Engineering, Immunology, Medical Informatics, Microbiology, Microscopy, Multidisciplinary Sciences, and Neurosciences. These categories were selected to capture the journals publishing the majority of peer-reviewed biomedical research. The original data pull included 1,166 journals, collectively publishing 213,449 articles. We filtered this list to the journals in the top quartiles by impact factor (IF) or number of articles published 2013. Additionally, the list was manually reviewed to exclude short report and review journals, and titles determined to be outside the fields of basic medical science or clinical research. The final study set included 318 journals, which published 130,330 articles in 2013. The study set represented 27% of the original Journal Citation Report list and 61% of the original citable articles. Prior to our analysis, the 2014 Journal Citations Reports was released. After our initial analyses and first preprint submission, the 2015 Journal Citations Reports was released. While we did not use the 2014 or 2015 data to amend the journals in the study set, we did employ data from all three reports in our analyses. In our data pull from JCR, we included the journal title, International Standard Serial Number (ISSN), the total citable items for 2013, 2014, and 2015, the total citations to the journal for 2013/14/15, the impact factors for 2013/14/15, and the publisher.

Luiz G. Correia & Jesús P. Mena-Chalco

This repository contains supplementary material for the Impact Factor Game papers, with experiment results and datasets together with the original model, scripts and the complete ODD description.

**************************************************************************************

The repository is organized as follows:

• JIF_Game.nlogo - NetLogo source file for the model
• JIF_Game_ODD_Document.pdf - Model description following the ODD protocol
• scripts - Helper scripts in Python
• examples - Videos with execution examples
• data - Datasets obtained from simulation runs
  • Strategies - Average results and example of journal ranking for each strategy
  • Policies - Average results and example of journal ranking for Model 1, 2 and 3
  • Interdisciplinary Network - Strategy adoption per discipline in different runs for clustering (Model 2 and 3)
• results - Experiment results for Models 1, 2 and 3
  • Distribution Patterns - verification experiments with distribution and growth patterns
  • Strategies - verification experiments with strategies
  • Policies - comparison between the two IF calculation policies (for each configuration)
  • Clusters - results for the cluster analysis on the interdisciplinary network

The position of an author on the byline of a paper affects the inferences readers make about their contributions to the research. We examine gender differences in authorship in the ecology literature using two datasets: submissions to six journals between 2010 and 2015 (regardless of whether they were accepted), and manuscripts published by 151 journals between 2009 and 2015. Women were less likely to be last (i.e., 'senior') authors (averaging ~23% across journals, years and datasets) and sole authors (~24%), but more likely to be first author (~38%), relative to their overall frequency of authorship (~31%). However, the proportion of women in all authorship roles, except sole authorship, has increased year-on-year. Women were less likely to be authors on papers with male last authors, and all-male papers were more abundant than expected given the overall gender ratio. Women were equally-well represented on papers published in higher versus lower impact factor journals at all authorship positions. Female first authors were less likely to serve as corresponding author of their papers; this difference increased with the degree of gender inequality in the author's home country, but did not depend on the gender of the last author. First authors from non-English speaking countries were less likely to serve as corresponding author of their papers, especially if the last author was from an English-speaking country. That women more often delegate corresponding authorship to one of their coauthors may increase the likelihood that readers undervalue their role in the research by shifting credit for their contributions to coauthors. We suggest that author contribution statements be more universally adopted and that these statements declare how and/or why the corresponding author was selected for this role.

Interdisciplinary Perspectives Index (IPI) scores of students in transdisciplinary (TD) and traditional doctoral programs at time of enrollment.

Development and Psychopathology Impact Factor 2024-2025 - ResearchHelpDesk - Development and Psychopathology - (ISSN - 0954-5794) This multidisciplinary journal is devoted to the publication of original, empirical, theoretical and review papers which address the interrelationship of typical and atypical development in children and adults. It is intended to serve the field of developmental psychopathology which strives to understand patterns of adaptation and maladaptation throughout the lifespan. This journal is of interest to psychologists, psychiatrists, social scientists, neuroscientists, paediatricians, and researchers. Abstracting and indexing services Child Development Abstracts and Bibliography Index Medicus Current Contents/Social & Behavioral Sciences PsycINFO SSCI and MEDLINE

Journals, type of publication and publisher datasets based in COVID-19 research.

Journal of pediatrics and neonatal care Impact Factor 2024-2025 - ResearchHelpDesk - Journal of Pediatrics & Neonatal Care (JPNC) is an international peer-reviewed open access journal which deals with the post-pregnancy problems and its solutions. This journal seeks to publish high quality papers on pediatric adolescent medicine, allergy and immunology, cardiology, critical care medicine, developmental-behavioral medicine, endocrinology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, gastroenterology, hematology-oncology, infectious diseases, neonatal-perinatal medicine, nephrology, neurology, emergency medicine, pulmonology and rheumatology. JPNC welcomes research papers, review articles, short communications, case reports, mini-review, opinions and letter to editors on latest ongoing research in the field of pediatrics & neonatal care. JPNC Classification Pediatrics physiology Pediatrics & Neonatal Care Nursing Pediatric Infectious Diseases Perinatal Mortality Prenatal Care Primary Care of the Premature Infant Palliative pediatric care Neonatal surgery Neonatal and pediatrics anesthesia Neonatal seizures Neonatal Jaundice Neonatal Sepsis Neonatal Ventilatory Management Pediatric Dermatology Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics Biomarkers of neonatal sepsis Birth Trauma Biomarkers and neonatal brain injury Infants and Toddlers Infant Care and Infant Health Impact of neonatal outreach on referral patterns Low Birth Weight Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Neonatal Gestational Age and Birth Weight Neonatal Fluid and Electrolyte Management Maternal drug use and neonatal neurodevelopmental outcomes Management of Specific Neonatal Surgical Conditions Pediatric Endocrinology Pediatric Bone Pediatric Gastroenterology Pediatric Nephrology and Urology Pediatric Ophthalmology Pediatric Otolaryngology Pediatric Secrets Pediatrics cardiology Pediatrics genetics Pediatrics hematology-oncology Pediatrics psychology Respiratory Support of the Preterm Infant Starting at Birth Down Syndrome Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Autism Anorexia Nervosa Acne Vulgaris Kendig and Chernick's Disorders of the Respiratory Tract in Children Inhaled Nitric Oxide in Premature Infants Multidrug Resistance Common in Neonatal Bacteremia Multicenter trials to assess safety and efficacy of neonatal therapies MRSA Infection in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Pediatric Echovirus Pediatric Metabolic Acidosis Simulation strategies for neonatal education thalassemia risk for premature atherosclerosis Therapeutic Hypothermia for Neonatal Encephalopathy Adolescent Medicine Child Abuse Pediatrics Hospice and Palliative Medicine Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Pediatric Emergency Medicine Pediatrics Sleep Medicine Pediatric Sports Medicine Journal Indexing PORTICO BASE Genamics JournalSeek OPEN ARCHIVES Semantic Scholar Similarity Check Scilit OCLC WorldCat ROAD Journal Listed ICMJE(International Commitee of Medical Journal Editors) Membership ORCiD iThenticate CrossMark Crossref

Background: Attribution to the original contributor upon reuse of published data is important both as a reward for data creators and to document the provenance of research findings. Previous studies have found that papers with publicly available datasets receive a higher number of citations than similar studies without available data. However, few previous analyses have had the statistical power to control for the many variables known to predict citation rate, which has led to uncertain estimates of the "citation benefit". Furthermore, little is known about patterns in data reuse over time and across datasets. Method and Results: Here, we look at citation rates while controlling for many known citation predictors, and investigate the variability of data reuse. In a multivariate regression on 10,555 studies that created gene expression microarray data, we found that studies that made data available in a public repository received 9% (95% confidence interval: 5% to 13%) more citations than similar studies for which the data was not made available. Date of publication, journal impact factor, open access status, number of authors, first and last author publication history, corresponding author country, institution citation history, and study topic were included as covariates. The citation benefit varied with date of dataset deposition: a citation benefit was most clear for papers published in 2004 and 2005, at about 30%. Authors published most papers using their own datasets within two years of their first publication on the dataset, whereas data reuse papers published by third-party investigators continued to accumulate for at least six years. To study patterns of data reuse directly, we compiled 9,724 instances of third party data reuse via mention of GEO or ArrayExpress accession numbers in the full text of papers. The level of third-party data use was high: for 100 datasets deposited in year 0, we estimated that 40 papers in PubMed reused a dataset by year 2, 100 by year 4, and more than 150 data reuse papers had been published by year 5. Data reuse was distributed across a broad base of datasets: a very conservative estimate found that 20% of the datasets deposited between 2003 and 2007 had been reused at least once by third parties. Conclusion: After accounting for other factors affecting citation rate, we find a robust citation benefit from open data, although a smaller one than previously reported. We conclude there is a direct effect of third-party data reuse that persists for years beyond the time when researchers have published most of the papers reusing their own data. Other factors that may also contribute to the citation benefit are considered.We further conclude that, at least for gene expression microarray data, a substantial fraction of archived datasets are reused, and that the intensity of dataset reuse has been steadily increasing since 2003.

IntroductionJournal self-citation contributes to the overall citation count of a journal and to some metrics like the impact factor. However, little is known about the extent of journal self-citations in COVID-19 research. This study aimed to determine the journal self-citations in COVID-19 research and to compare them according to the type of publication and publisher.MethodsData in COVID-19 research extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection 2020–2023 was collected and further analyzed with InCites. The journals with the highest self-citation rates and self-citation per publication were identified. Statistical comparisons were made according to the type of publication and publishers, as well as with other major infectious diseases.ResultsThe median self-citation rate was 4.0% (IQR 0–11.7%), and the median journal self-citation rate was 5.9% (IQR 0–12.5%). 1,859 journals (13% of total coverage) had self-citation rates at or above 20%, meaning that more than one in five references are journal self-citations. There was a positive and statistically significant correlation of self-citations with the other indicators, including number of publications, citations, and self-citations per publication (p

1. Scientists face an overwhelming number of peer-reviewed publications to read and must choose which to cite. Citation rate is used to measure a scientist's productivity and often affects hiring and promotion. Thus, as the number of scientific publications grows, competition for notice increases. A publication's title is the first step in the filtering process of a reader; the features of a title that are correlated with citation rate have not been explored for entomology journals. 2. We analyzed titles from two entomology and two ecology journals, documenting the presence of Latin names, common names, functional groups, geographic location, question marks, whether the title attempted humor or was divided into two parts, and the number of words in the title. 3. We found that using a Latin name in a title significantly decreases citations. Using Latin names in a title likely causes readers who are not immediately familiar with that name to skip the paper entirely when perusing a journal's table of contents, whereas titles that describe a general research area, without indicating the study organism, draw a wider audience and thus more citations. 4. We found that use of functional group names or geographic location in a title increased citations in entomology journals; however, these patterns were driven by a small portion of the data. Use of common names, presence of punctuation, whether the title attempted humor, and title length had no effect on citation rates. 5. Our findings may help authors to write better titles and therefore improve readership and citation rate.

Most productive journals with at least 600 COVID-19 publications indexed in the Web of Science 2020–2023.

IntroductionJournal self-citation contributes to the overall citation count of a journal and to some metrics like the impact factor. However, little is known about the extent of journal self-citations in COVID-19 research. This study aimed to determine the journal self-citations in COVID-19 research and to compare them according to the type of publication and publisher.MethodsData in COVID-19 research extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection 2020–2023 was collected and further analyzed with InCites. The journals with the highest self-citation rates and self-citation per publication were identified. Statistical comparisons were made according to the type of publication and publishers, as well as with other major infectious diseases.ResultsThe median self-citation rate was 4.0% (IQR 0–11.7%), and the median journal self-citation rate was 5.9% (IQR 0–12.5%). 1,859 journals (13% of total coverage) had self-citation rates at or above 20%, meaning that more than one in five references are journal self-citations. There was a positive and statistically significant correlation of self-citations with the other indicators, including number of publications, citations, and self-citations per publication (p

Comparison of journal self-citations in COVID-19 with other infectious diseases.

ABSTRACT Latin America embodies countries of special interest for ecological studies, given that areas with great value for biodiversity are located within their territories. This highlights the importance of an evaluation of ecological research in the Latin America region. We assessed the scientific participation of Latin American researchers in ecological journals, patterns of international collaboration, and defined the main characteristics of the articles. Although Latin American publications have increased in fourteen years, they accounted up to 9% of publications in Ecology. Brazil leaded the scientific production in Latin America, followed by Argentina and Mexico. In general, Latin American articles represented a low percentage of most journals total publication, with particularly low expression in high impact-factor journals. A half of the Latin American publications had international collaboration. Articles with more than five authors and with international collaboration were the most cited. Descriptive studies, mainly based in old theories, are still majority, suggesting that Ecology is in a developing stage in Latin America.

Scientific research is often thought of as being conducted by individuals and small teams striving for disciplinary advances. Yet as a whole, this endeavor more closely resembles a complex and integrated system of people, papers, and ideas. Studies of co-authorship and citation networks have revealed important structural properties of researchers and articles, but currently the structure of scientific ideas themselves is not well understood. In this study, we posit that topic networks may be a useful framework for revealing the nature of conceptual relationships. Using this framework, we map the landscape of interconnected research topics covered in the multidisciplinary journal PNAS since 2000, constructing networks in which nodes represent topics of study and edges give the extent to which topics occur in the same papers. The network displays small-world architecture, characterized by regions of dense local connectivity with sparse connectivity between them. In this network, dense local connectivity additionally gives rise to distinct clusters of related topics. Yet notably, these clusters tend not to align with assigned article classifications, and instead contain topics from various disciplines. Using a temporal graph, we find that small-worldness has increased over time, suggesting growing efficiency and integration of ideas. Finally, we define two measures of interdisciplinarity, one of which is found to be positively associated with PNAS’s impact factor. Broadly, this work suggests that complex and dynamic patterns of knowledge emerge from scientific research, and that structures reflecting intellectual integration may be beneficial for obtaining scientific insight.

Patterns identified in SEM images which indicate shared provenance.

These patterns likely indicate re-use of text in Methods sections. Some of these patterns may reflect past licensing agreements between SEM manufacturers or local retailers, although we were not able to find evidence of this being the case. (XLSX)

Strings extracted from full text for labeling are not included to respect the licensing terms and conditions laid out in the text and data mining agreements established by the publishers of the journals we surveyed. (XLSX)