This description is part of the blog post "Systematic Literature Review of teaching Open Science" https://sozmethode.hypotheses.org/839

According to my opinion, we do not pay enough attention to teaching Open Science in higher education. Therefore, I designed a seminar to teach students the practices of Open Science by doing qualitative research.About this seminar, I wrote the article ”Teaching Open Science and qualitative methods“. For the article ”Teaching Open Science and qualitative methods“, I started to review the literature on ”Teaching Open Science“. The result of my literature review is that certain aspects of Open Science are used for teaching. However, Open Science with all its aspects (Open Access, Open Data, Open Methodology, Open Science Evaluation and Open Science Tools) is not an issue in publications about teaching.

Based on this insight, I have started a systematic literature review. I realized quickly that I need help to analyse and interpret the articles and to evaluate my preliminary findings. Especially different disciplinary cultures of teaching different aspects of Open Science are challenging, as I myself, as a social scientist, do not have enough insight to be able to interpret the results correctly. Therefore, I would like to invite you to participate in this research project!

I am now looking for people who would like to join a collaborative process to further explore and write the systematic literature review on “Teaching Open Science“. Because I want to turn this project into a Massive Open Online Paper (MOOP). According to the 10 rules of Tennant et al (2019) on MOOPs, it is crucial to find a core group that is enthusiastic about the topic. Therefore, I am looking for people who are interested in creating the structure of the paper and writing the paper together with me. I am also looking for people who want to search for and review literature or evaluate the literature I have already found. Together with the interested persons I would then define, the rules for the project (cf. Tennant et al. 2019). So if you are interested to contribute to the further search for articles and / or to enhance the interpretation and writing of results, please get in touch. For everyone interested to contribute, the list of articles collected so far is freely accessible at Zotero: https://www.zotero.org/groups/2359061/teaching_open_science. The figure shown below provides a first overview of my ongoing work. I created the figure with the free software yEd and uploaded the file to zenodo, so everyone can download and work with it:

To make transparent what I have done so far, I will first introduce what a systematic literature review is. Secondly, I describe the decisions I made to start with the systematic literature review. Third, I present the preliminary results.

Systematic literature review – an Introduction

Systematic literature reviews “are a method of mapping out areas of uncertainty, and identifying where little or no relevant research has been done.” (Petticrew/Roberts 2008: 2). Fink defines the systematic literature review as a “systemic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners.” (Fink 2019: 6). The aim of a systematic literature reviews is to surpass the subjectivity of a researchers’ search for literature. However, there can never be an objective selection of articles. This is because the researcher has for example already made a preselection by deciding about search strings, for example “Teaching Open Science”. In this respect, transparency is the core criteria for a high-quality review.

In order to achieve high quality and transparency, Fink (2019: 6-7) proposes the following seven steps:

1. Selecting a research question.
2. Selecting the bibliographic database.
3. Choosing the search terms.
4. Applying practical screening criteria.
5. Applying methodological screening criteria.
6. Doing the review.
7. Synthesizing the results.

I have adapted these steps for the “Teaching Open Science” systematic literature review. In the following, I will present the decisions I have made.

Systematic literature review – decisions I made

1. Research question: I am interested in the following research questions: How is Open Science taught in higher education? Is Open Science taught in its full range with all aspects like Open Access, Open Data, Open Methodology, Open Science Evaluation and Open Science Tools? Which aspects are taught? Are there disciplinary differences as to which aspects are taught and, if so, why are there such differences?
2. Databases: I started my search at the Directory of Open Science (DOAJ). “DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.” (https://doaj.org/) Secondly, I used the Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (base). Base is operated by Bielefeld University Library and “one of the world’s most voluminous search engines especially for academic web resources” (base-search.net). Both platforms are non-commercial and focus on Open Access publications and thus differ from the commercial publication databases, such as Web of Science and Scopus. For this project, I deliberately decided against commercial providers and the restriction of search in indexed journals. Thus, because my explicit aim was to find articles that are open in the context of Open Science.
3. Search terms: To identify articles about teaching Open Science I used the following search strings: “teaching open science” OR teaching “open science” OR teach „open science“. The topic search looked for the search strings in title, abstract and keywords of articles. Since these are very narrow search terms, I decided to broaden the method. I searched in the reference lists of all articles that appear from this search for further relevant literature. Using Google Scholar I checked which other authors cited the articles in the sample. If the so checked articles met my methodological criteria, I included them in the sample and looked through the reference lists and citations at Google Scholar. This process has not yet been completed.
4. Practical screening criteria: I have included English and German articles in the sample, as I speak these languages (articles in other languages are very welcome, if there are people who can interpret them!). In the sample only journal articles, articles in edited volumes, working papers and conference papers from proceedings were included. I checked whether the journals were predatory journals – such articles were not included. I did not include blogposts, books or articles from newspapers. I only included articles that fulltexts are accessible via my institution (University of Kassel). As a result, recently published articles at Elsevier could not be included because of the special situation in Germany regarding the Project DEAL (https://www.projekt-deal.de/about-deal/). For articles that are not freely accessible, I have checked whether there is an accessible version in a repository or whether preprint is available. If this was not the case, the article was not included. I started the analysis in May 2019.
5. Methodological criteria: The method described above to check the reference lists has the problem of subjectivity. Therefore, I hope that other people will be interested in this project and evaluate my decisions. I have used the following criteria as the basis for my decisions: First, the articles must focus on teaching. For example, this means that articles must describe how a course was designed and carried out. Second, at least one aspect of Open Science has to be addressed. The aspects can be very diverse (FOSS, repositories, wiki, data management, etc.) but have to comply with the principles of openness. This means, for example, I included an article when it deals with the use of FOSS in class and addresses the aspects of openness of FOSS. I did not include articles when the authors describe the use of a particular free and open source software for teaching but did not address the principles of openness or re-use.
6. Doing the review: Due to the methodical approach of going through the reference lists, it is possible to create a map of how the articles relate to each other. This results in thematic clusters and connections between clusters. The starting point for the map were four articles (Cook et al. 2018; Marsden, Thompson, and Plonsky 2017; Petras et al. 2015; Toelch and Ostwald 2018) that I found using the databases and criteria described above. I used yEd to generate the network. „yEd is a powerful desktop application that can be used to quickly and effectively generate high-quality diagrams.” (https://www.yworks.com/products/yed) In the network, arrows show, which articles are cited in an article and which articles are cited by others as well. In addition, I made an initial rough classification of the content using colours. This classification is based on the contents mentioned in the articles’ title and abstract. This rough content classification requires a more exact, i.e., content-based subdivision and

The data in this set was culled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), and a sample of peer reviewed scholarly journals in the field of Library Science. The data include journals that are open access, which was first defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative: By ‘open access’ to [scholarly] literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Starting with a batch of 377 journals, we focused our dataset to include journals that met the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in English or abstracted in English, 3) actively published at the time of..., Data Collection In the spring of 2023, researchers gathered 377 scholarly journals whose content covered the work of librarians, archivists, and affiliated information professionals. This data encompassed 221 journals from the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), widely regarded as an authoritative database in the field of librarianship. From the Directory of Open Access Journals, we included 144 LIS journals. We also included 12 other journals not indexed in DOAJ or LISA, based on the researchers’ knowledge of existing OA library journals. The data is separated into several different sets representing the different indices and journals we searched. The first set includes journals from the database LISA. The following fields are in this dataset:

Journal: title of the journal

Publisher: title of the publishing company

Open Data Policy: lists whether an open data exists and what the policy is

Country of publication: country where the journal is publ..., , # Open access practices of selected library science journals

The data in this set was culled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), and a sample of peer reviewed scholarly journals in the field of Library Science.

The data include journals that are open access, which was first defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative:Â

By ‘open access’ to [scholarly] literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

Starting with a batch of 377 journals, we focused our dataset to include journals that met the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in Engli...

Database of bibliographic citations of multidisciplinary areas that covers various journals of medical, scientific, and social sciences including humanities.Publisher independent global citation database.

Academic journals indicators developed from the information contained in the Scopus database (Elsevier B.V.). These indicators can be used to assess and analyze scientific domains.

This is dataset about Serbian papers published in journals indexed in Web of Science collections in the period 2003-2021
We used as "serbian" countries: Serbia, Serbia and Montenegro, Yugoslavia

The terms Serbian researcher and Serbian paper used in this dataset are defined as follows:
Serbian researcher is a researcher affiliated with a Serbian institution,
Serbian paper is a paper with at least one Serbian researcher in the list of authors.
This means that a paper published by a researcher with non-Serbian nationality (i.e. German) working at a Serbian institution is taken into account in the analysis of Serbian papers described in this paper.

Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science (WoS) database was used for data acquisition. We searched Serbian papers in two WoS collections - Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). The search query executed over those collections on 18th of January, 2022.
CU=(%Serbia% OR %Serbia and Montenegro% OR %Yugoslavia%) AND PY=[2003-2021]

We also analyzed the number of articles of Serbian researchers published in journals with an unstable impact factor (IF), i.e. journals which didn’t have an IF before 2008, and had one in some subperiod of 2008-2015, i.e. lost their IF until 2015. The majority of those journals stopped being indexed in Web of Science as a ban for losing the quality or having predatory journal behavior. We found 143 such journals and their ISSNs by using the JCR (Journal citation reports in the period 2007 - 2015).

The global market for academic research databases is experiencing robust growth, projected to be valued at $259.3 million in 2025 and exhibiting a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 5.9% from 2025 to 2033. This expansion is driven by several key factors. The increasing digitization of scholarly publications and the growing reliance on online research resources across universities, research institutions, and corporations are significant contributors. Furthermore, the expanding availability of open-access journals and repositories, while presenting challenges to some established players, ultimately broadens the overall market by increasing accessibility and usage. The rising demand for advanced search functionalities, data analytics tools integrated within these databases, and robust citation management systems also fuels market growth. Different subscription models, including free and charge-based access, cater to diverse user needs – students, teachers, experts, and others – further driving market segmentation and overall growth. The North American market currently holds a significant share due to the presence of major research institutions and established database providers. However, increasing research activities in Asia-Pacific and other regions are poised to fuel future growth, with a potentially significant increase in the market share in these regions over the forecast period. Competition remains intense among established players like Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, alongside newer entrants. Differentiation through superior indexing, advanced search capabilities, and specialized content areas is vital for success in this competitive landscape. The market segmentation by application (Student, Teacher, Expert, Others) and type of access (Charge, Free) provides valuable insights into the diverse user base and revenue streams. The "charge" segment is expected to maintain a significant market share, driven by the demand for comprehensive and specialized research content requiring paid subscriptions. However, the "free" segment, fueled by the increasing availability of open-access resources, will also show considerable growth, broadening accessibility and market penetration. Regional growth patterns will likely reflect existing research infrastructure and investments in higher education and research across different geographic areas. Continued technological advancements and innovation in areas such as artificial intelligence-powered search and data analysis will further shape the market landscape, leading to more sophisticated and efficient research tools in the years to come.

The data in this set was culled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), and a sample of peer reviewed scholarly journals in the field of Library Science. The data include journals that are open access, which was first defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative: By ‘open access’ to [scholarly] literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Starting with a batch of 377 journals, we focused our dataset to include journals that met the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in English or abstracted in English, 3) actively published at the time of analysis, and 4) scoped to librarianship. The dataset presents an overview of the landscape of open access scholarly publishing in the LIS field during a very specific time period, spring and summer of 2023. Methods Data Collection In the spring of 2023, researchers gathered 377 scholarly journals whose content covered the work of librarians, archivists, and affiliated information professionals. This data encompassed 221 journals from the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), widely regarded as an authoritative database in the field of librarianship. From the Directory of Open Access Journals, we included 144 LIS journals. We also included 12 other journals not indexed in DOAJ or LISA, based on the researchers’ knowledge of existing OA library journals. The data is separated into several different sets representing the different indices and journals we searched. The first set includes journals from the database LISA. The following fields are in this dataset:

Journal: title of the journal

Publisher: title of the publishing company

Open Data Policy: lists whether an open data exists and what the policy is

Country of publication: country where the journal is published

Open ranking: details whether the journal is diamond, gold, and/or green

Open peer review: specifies if the journal does open peer review

Author retains copyright: explains copyright policy

Charges: Details whether there is an article processing charge

In DOAJ: details whether the journal is also published in the Directory of Open Access Journals

The second set includes similar information, but it includes the titles of journals listed in the DOAJ.

Journal: states the title of the journal

Publisher: title of the publishing company

Country: country where the journal is published

Open Data Policy: lists whether an open data exists

Open Data Notes: Details about the open data policy

OA since: lists when the journal became open access

Open ranking: details whether the journal is diamond, gold, and/or green

Open peer review: specifies if the journal does open peer review

Author Holds Copyright without Restriction: lists

APC: Details whether there is an article processing charge

Type of CC: lists the Creative Commons license applied to the journal articles

In LISA: details whether the journal is also published in the Library and Information Science Abstracts database

A third dataset includes twelve scholarly, peer reviewed journals focused on Library and Information Science but not included in the DOAJ or LISA.

Journal: states the title of the journal

Publisher: title of the publishing company

Country: country where the journal is published

Open Data Policy: lists whether an open data exists

Open Data Notes: Details about the open data policy

Open ranking: details whether the journal is diamond, gold, and/or green

Open peer review: specifies if the journal does open peer review

Author Holds Copyright without Restriction: lists

APC: Details whether there is an article processing charge

Type of CC: lists the Creative Commons license applied to the journal articles

In LISA?: details whether the journal is also published in the Library and Information Science Abstracts database

Data Processing The researchers downloaded an Excel file from the publisher Proquest that listed the 221 journals included in LISA. From the DOAJ, the researchers searched and scoped to build an initial list. Thus, 144 journals were identified after limiting search results to English-language only journals and those whose scope fell under the following DOAJ search terms: librar* (to cover library, libraries, librarian, librarians, librarianship). Journals also needed to have been categorized within the DOAJ subject heading “Bibliography. Library science. Information resources. And for the journals that we analyzed that were in either index, those journals were included based on the researchers’ knowledge of current scholarly, peer-reviewed journals that would count toward tenure at their own university, an R1 university. Once the journals were identified, the researchers divided up the journals amongst each other and scoped them for the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in English or abstracted in English, 3) actively published at the time of analysis, and 4) scoped to librarianship. The end result was 134 journals that the researchers then explored on their individual websites to identify the following items: open data policies, open access publication options, country of origin, publisher, and peer review process. The researchers also looked for article processing costs, type of Creative Commons licensing (open licenses that allow users to redistribute and sometimes remix intellectual property), and whether the journals were included in either the DOAJ and/or LISA index. References: Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2002) http://www.soros.org/openaccess/

Introduction: These datasets contain information about journals in the eight regions of the world based on United Nations SDG classification (Central& Southern Asia, Europe, Eastern &South Eastern Asia, Latin America, North Africa& Western Asia, Oceania, North America and Sub-Saharan Africa) that are indexed in Web of Science/Scopus and are available in Ulrich periodical directory. The datasets were created by matching Ulrich journal information with journal information from Web of Science and Scopus.

Data Creation: A single Web of Science master journal list was created for SSCI, SCI, AHCI and ESCI by combining and removing duplicate records from their lists; the Web of Science master journal contained 21,908 unique journals. Only active scholarly journals from Scopus were included in this study; i.e. duplicates, all inactive sources, trade journals, book series, monographs and conference proceedings were removed. 26,029 active journals of the 43,013 sources in Scopus were included. Journal lists from 239 countries were collected from Ulrich comprehensive periodical directory and analyzed by region. After removal of duplicates, this generated a database of 83,429 unique active academic journals. To compile regional and global datasets, duplicate journals in the regional and global levels, respectively, were removed. The master journal lists created from Web of Science, Scopus and Ulrich were transferred to an SQL database for querying. Journal matching was carried out in two steps. Firstly, the ISSN numbers of journals in Web of Science and Scopus were used to match journal records to Ulrich. In the second step, the remaining journals were then matched using their titles, and these matches were manually verified to reduce the chances of false positives. Using these two steps, we were able to match 20,255 (92.46%) of the journals in Web of Science, and 23,349 (89.70%) of the academic journals from Scopus, with Ulrichsweb journal list.

Suggested questions in the field of physicians’ dual practice in Iran for conducting future studies.

Research data to accommodate the article "Overlay journals: a study of the current landscape" (https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006221125208)

Identifying the sample of overlay journals was an explorative process (occurring during April 2021 to February 2022). The sample of investigated overlay journals were identified by using the websites of Episciences.org (2021), Scholastica (2021), Free Journal Network (2021), Open Journals (2021), PubPub (2022), and Wikipedia (2021). In total, this study identified 34 overlay journals. Please see the paper for more details about the excluded journal types.

The journal ISSN numbers, manuscript source repositories, first overlay volumes, article volumes, publication languages, peer-review type, licence for published articles, author costs, publisher types, submission policy, and preprint availability policy were observed by inspecting journal editorial policies and submission guidelines found from journal websites. The overlay journals’ ISSN numbers were identified by examining journal websites and cross-checking this information with the Ulrich’s periodicals database (Ulrichsweb, 2021). Journals that published review reports, either with reviewers’ names or anonymously, were classified as operating with open peer-review. Publisher types defined by Laakso and Björk (2013) were used to categorise the findings concerning the publishers. If the journal website did not include publisher information, the editorial board was interpreted to publish the journal.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) field of science classification was used to categorise the journals into different domains of science. The journals’ primary OECD field of sciences were defined by the authors through examining the journal websites.

Whether the journals were indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Scopus, or Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science Core collection’s journal master list was examined by searching the services with journal ISSN numbers and journal titles.

The identified overlay journals were examined from the viewpoint of both qualitative and quantitative journal metrics. The qualitative metrics comprised the Nordic expert panel rankings of scientific journals, namely the Finnish Publication Forum, the Danish Bibliometric Research Indicator and the Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers. Searches were conducted from the web portals of the above services with both ISSN numbers and journal titles. Clarivate Analytics’ Journal Citation Reports database was searched with the use of both ISSN numbers and journal titles to identify whether the journals had a Journal Citation Indicator (JCI), Two-Year Impact Factor (IF) and an Impact Factor ranking (IF rank). The examined Journal Impact Factors and Impact Factor rankings were for the year 2020 (as released in 2021).

Journal of Political Economy Acceptance Rate - ResearchHelpDesk - The Journal of Political Economy is a monthly peer-reviewed academic journal published by the University of Chicago Press. Established by James Laurence Laughlin in 1892, it covers both theoretical and empirical economics. In the past, the journal published quarterly from its introduction through 1905, ten issues per volume from 1906 through 1921, and bimonthly from 1922 through 2019. The editor-in-chief is Magne Mogstad (University of Chicago). Abstract & Indexing Articles that appear in the Journal of Political Economy are indexed in the following abstracting and indexing services: Ulrich's Periodicals Directory (Print) Ulrichsweb (Online) J-Gate HINARI Association for Asian Studies Bibliography of Asian Studies (Online) Business Index CABI Abstracts on Hygiene and Communicable Diseases (Online) Agricultural Economics Database CAB Abstracts (Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux) Dairy Science Abstracts (Online) Environmental Impact Global Health Leisure Tourism Database Nutrition and Food Sciences Database Rural Development Abstracts (Online) Soil Science Database Soils and Fertilizers (Online) Tropical Diseases Bulletin (Online) World Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology Abstracts (Online) Clarivate Analytics Current Contents Social Sciences Citation Index Web of Science De Gruyter Saur Dietrich's Index Philosophicus IBZ - Internationale Bibliographie der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Zeitschriftenliteratur Internationale Bibliographie der Rezensionen Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlicher Literatur EBSCOhost America: History and Life ATLA Religion Database (American Theological Library Association) Biography Index: Past and Present (H.W. Wilson) Book Review Digest Plus (H.W. Wilson) Business Source Alumni Edition (Full Text) Business Source Complete (Full Text) Business Source Corporate (Full Text) Business Source Corporate Plus (Full Text) Business Source Elite (Full Text) Business Source Premier (Full Text) Business Source Ultimate (Full Text) Current Abstracts EBSCO MegaFILE (Full Text) EBSCO Periodicals Collection (Full Text) EconLit with Full Text (Full Text) ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) GeoRef Historical Abstracts (Online) Humanities & Social Sciences Index Retrospective: 1907-1984 (H.W. Wilson) Humanities Index Retrospective: 1907-1984 (H.W. Wilson) Humanities Source Humanities Source Ultimate Index to Legal Periodicals Retrospective: 1908-1981 (H.W. Wilson) Legal Source Library & Information Science Source MLA International Bibliography (Modern Language Association) OmniFile Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson) Poetry & Short Story Reference Center Political Science Complete Public Affairs Index Readers' Guide Retrospective: 1890-1982 (H.W. Wilson) Russian Academy of Sciences Bibliographies Social Sciences Abstracts Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) Social Sciences Index Retrospective: 1907-1983 (H.W. Wilson) SocINDEX SocINDEX with Full Text TOC Premier Women's Studies International Elsevier BV GEOBASE Scopus ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) Gale Academic ASAP Academic OneFile Advanced Placement Government and Social Studies Book Review Index Plus Business & Company ProFile ASAP Business ASAP Business ASAP International Business Collection Business Insights: Essentials Business Insights: Global Business, Economics and Theory Collection Expanded Academic ASAP General Business File ASAP General OneFile General Reference Center Gold General Reference Centre International InfoTrac Custom InfoTrac Student Edition MLA International Bibliography (Modern Language Association) Popular Magazines US History Collection H.W. Wilson Social Sciences Index National Library of Medicine PubMed OCLC ArticleFirst Periodical Abstracts Sociological Abstracts (Online), Selective Ovid EconLit ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) GeoRef ProQuest ABI/INFORM Collection ABI/INFORM Global (American Business Information) ABI/INFORM Research (American Business Information) Business Premium Collection EconLit ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) GeoRef Health Management Database Health Research Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Core MLA International Bibliography (Modern Language Association) PAIS Archive Professional ABI/INFORM Complete Professional ProQuest Central ProQuest 5000 ProQuest 5000 International ProQuest Central ProQuest Pharma Collection Research Library Social Science Database Social Science Premium Collection Sociological Abstracts (Online), Selective Worldwide Political Science Abstracts, Selective SCIMP (Selective Cooperative Index of Management Periodicals) Taylor & Francis Educational Research Abstracts Online Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia Asian - Pacific Economic Literature (Online)

Journal of Marine Science and Technology Publication fee - ResearchHelpDesk - The Journal of Marine Science and Technology provides a forum for the discussion of current issues in marine science and technology. The range of topics extends from research in naval architecture, marine engineering, and ocean engineering to marine-related research in the fields of environmental science and technology, oceanography, computational mechanics, and information technology. In addition to original, full-length refereed contributions presenting new research and developments in the field, the journal also publishes review papers authored by leading authorities. Journal of Marine Science and Technology - Abstract & indexing Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, SCOPUS, INSPEC, Google Scholar, AGRICOLA, ASFA, Current Contents/Engineering, Computing and Technology, EBSCO Academic Search, EBSCO Discovery Service, EBSCO Engineering Source, EBSCO STM Source, EBSCO TOC Premier, EI Compendex, Gale, Gale Academic OneFile, Gale InfoTrac, Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China, Japanese Science and Technology Agency (JST), Mechanical and Transportation Engineering Abstracts, Naver, Oceanic Abstracts, OCLC WorldCat Discovery Service, ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, ProQuest Central, ProQuest Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database, ProQuest Engineering, ProQuest Environment Abstracts (Module), ProQuest Environmental Science, ProQuest Materials Science & Engineering Database, ProQuest Natural Science Collection, ProQuest Science Database, ProQuest SciTech Premium Collection, ProQuest Technology Collection, ProQuest-ExLibris Primo, ProQuest-ExLibris Summon, Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)

In recent decades, we have observed an intensification of science, technology and innovation activities in Brazil. The increase in production of scientific papers indexed in international databases, however, has not been accompanied by an equivalent increase in the impact of publications. This paper presents a methodology for analyzing production and the impact of certain research areas in Brazil related to two aspects: the origin of the journals (national or foreign) and international collaboration. These two variables were selected for being of particular importance in understanding the context of scientific production and communication in countries with emerging economies. The sample consisted of papers written by Brazilian researchers in 19 subfields of knowledge published from 2002 to 2011, totaling 85,082 papers. To calculate the impact, we adopted a normalized indicator called the relative subfield citedness (Rw) using a window of 5 years to obtain measurements evaluated in 2 different years: 2007 and 2012. The data on papers and citations were collected from the Web of Science database. From the results, we note that most of the subfields have presented, from one quinquennium to another, improved performance in the world production rankings. Regarding publication in national and foreign journals, we observed a trend in the distribution maintenance of production of the subfields based on the origin of the journal. Specifically, for impact, we identified a lower Rw pattern for Brazilian papers when they were published in national journals in all subfields. When Brazilian products are published in foreign journals, we observed a higher impact for those papers, even surpassing the average global impact in some subfields. For international collaboration, we analyzed the percentage of participation of foreign researchers and the connection between collaboration and the impact of papers, especially emphasizing the distinction of hyperauthorship papers in terms of production and impact.

The dataset contains bibliographic information about scientific articles published by researchers from Norwegian research organizations and is an enhanced subset of data from the Cristin database. Cristin (current research information system in Norway) is a database with bibliographic records of all research articles with an Norwegian affiliation with a publicly funded research institution in Norway. The subset is limited to metadata about journal articles reported in the period 2013-2021 (186,621 records), and further limited to information of relevance for the study (see below). Article metadata are enhanced with open access status by several sources, particularly unpaywall, DOAJ and hybrid-information in case an article is part of a publish-and-read-deal.

Characteristics of the included studies and their main findings.

The search for scientific production will be carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Embase databases via CAFe remote access, through the Journal Portal of the Coordination of Superior Level Staff Improvement (CAPES); and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), via the Virtual Health Library (VHL). The search strategy was built on PubMed, using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and added keywords, which were adapted for other databases.

These indicators monitor scientific outcomes in the form of publications along innovation areas. The insights contained in them may help the understanding of societal challenges, contribute to the emergence of future technological or social innovations, or help to improve enabling conditions. We present the number of scientific peer-reviewed publications in the Web of Science database. Publications represent research activity in specific countries, which in turn makes entrepreneurial activities and investment more likely. Similar publication and investment patterns hint at the presence of learning networks between firms and universities. As we only track English-language publications in Web of Science indexed journals, some increases in publications may be due to the increased pressure to publish in such journals rather than to an actual increase in the productivity of a country’s researchers in the respective field. Countries that put a higher emphasis on publications in their native language may underperform according to these metrics. English-speaking countries or those where English is more dominant are likely to perform better with this metric.

Biomed research international Acceptance Rate - ResearchHelpDesk - Aims and scope BioMed Research International is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles and reviews articles covering a wide range of subjects in life sciences and medicine. The journal is divided into 56 subject areas. Journal Title History BioMed Research International 2013–Current Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2001–2012 (Title Changed) Acknowledgements BioMed Research International was founded in 2001 by Professor Abdelali Haoudi who served as the Editor-in-Chief of the journal between 2001 and 2008. Open Access BioMed Research International is an open-access journal. All articles are immediately available to read and reuse upon publication. Full list of databases and services Abstracts on Hygiene and Communicable Diseases Academic OneFile - Agriculture Collection Academic Search Alumni Edition Academic Search Complete Access to Global Online Research in Agriculture (AGORA) AgBiotech Net AgBiotech News and Information Agricultural Economics Database Agricultural Engineering Abstracts Agroforestry Abstracts AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts Algology, Mycology and Protozoology (Microbiology C) Animal Breeding Abstracts Animal Production Database Animal Science Database Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B) Biocontrol News and Information BioEngineering Abstracts Biofuels Abstracts Biological Abstracts Biological Sciences BIOSIS Previews Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Biotechnology Research Abstracts Botanical Pesticides CAB Abstracts Cabell’s Directories Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology Abstracts (CEABA) CINAHL Plus with Full Text CNKI Scholar Corrosion Abstracts Crop Physiology Abstracts Crop Science Database Dairy Science Abstracts Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) EBSCOhost Connection EBSCOhost Research Databases Elsevier BIOBASE - Current Awareness in Biological Sciences (CABS) EMBASE EMBIOlogy EMCare Engineering Research Database Entomology Abstracts Environmental Impact Environmental Science Database Expanded Academic ASAP Field Crop Abstracts Forest Products Abstracts Forest Science Database Forestry Abstracts Global Health Google Scholar Grasslands and Forage Abstracts Health Reference Center Academic Helminthological Abstracts HighBeam Research HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme Horticultural Science Abstracts Index Medicus Index Veterinarius Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts InfoTrac Custom journals J-Gate Portal Journal Citation Reports - Science Edition Maize Abstracts Medical and Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Abstracts MEDLINE Nematological Abstracts Nursing and Allied Health Collection: Comprehensive Nursing Resource Center Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews Series A Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews Series B Nutrition and Food Sciences Database Open Access Journals Integrated Service System Project (GoOA) Ornamental Horticulture Parasitology Database Pig News and Information Plant Breeding Abstracts Plant Genetic Resources Abstracts Plant Genetics and Breeding Database Plant Growth Regulator Abstracts Plant Protection Database Polymer Library Postharvest News and Information Poultry Abstracts Primo Central Index Professional ProQuest Central ProQuest Advanced Technologies and Aerospace Collection ProQuest Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central ProQuest Health and Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest Technology Collection Protozoological Abstracts PubMed PubMed Central Review of Aromatic and Medicinal Plants Review of Medical and Veterinary Entomology Review of Medical and Veterinary Mycology Review of Plant Pathology Rice Abstracts Rural Development Abstracts SafetyLit Science Citation Index Expanded Scopus Seed Abstracts Soil Science Database Soils and Fertilizers Abstracts Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts Sugar Industry Abstracts Technology Research Database The Summon Service Toxicology Abstracts Tropical Diseases Bulletin Veterinary Bulletin Veterinary Science Database Virology and AIDS Abstracts Web of Science (WoS) Weed Abstracts Wheat, Barley and Triticale Abstracts World Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology Abstracts WorldCat Discovery Services

Motivation is of great importance in the teaching-learning process, because motivated students seek out opportunities and show interest and enthusiasm in carrying out their tasks. The objective of this review is to identify and present the information available in the literature on the status quo of motivation among nursing program entrants. This is a qualitative scoping review study, a type of literature review designed to map out and find evidence to address a specific research objective, following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The objective was outlined using the PCC (Population, Concept, Context) acronym. The protocol was developed and registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform under DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/EJNGY. The search strategy and database selection were defined by a library and information science professional together with the authors. The search will be carried out in the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Literatura Latino Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, Lilacs Esp, National Library of Medicine (PubMed), ScienceDirect, Scopus, and the Web of Science platform. The researchers will meet to discuss discrepancies and make decisions using a consensus model, and a third researcher will be tasked with independently resolving any conflicts. Data extraction will involve two independent researchers reviewing each article. Documents such as original articles; theoretical studies; experience reports; clinical study articles; case studies; normative, integrative, and systematic reviews; meta-analyses; meta-syntheses; monographs; theses; and dissertations in English, Portuguese, and Spanish from 2017 to 2023 were included. The results will be presented in tabular and/or diagrammatic format, along with a narrative summary.