Open Access of COVID-19-related publications in the first quarter of 2020: a preliminary study based in PubMed

Bibliometric study of the scientific productivity of the COVID-19 impact on constructs affecting happiness in university students

COVID-19 has caused a wide range of psychological problems, such as panic disorders, anxiety, and depression. Knowing what others have researched on, what constructs they have focused on, will (a) summarize published information, (b) help identify research gaps, and (c) encourage future research that addresses these gaps. The aim of the study was to analyze the bibliometric indicators of scientific productivity of the impact of COVID-19 on constructs affecting undergraduate happiness. A bibliometric study was conducted. The PubMed database was used. Data summarized were: authors, year of publication, journal name, country, language of publication, and subtopic addressed. A total of 16 English-language studies were identified between April 2022 and December 2022. There were 12 countries that have published on the impact of COVID-19 on constructs affecting college students' happiness. Most of the studies were developed in the United States (n = 4, 25%) and China (n = 2, 12.5%). Thirteen journals publishing these topics were detected. The subtopics considered were organized into nine categories (e.g., a: Psychological impact, b: Adverse childhood experiences, c: Stress, d: Personality traits, e: Perception of the educational environment, f: Spiritual health, g: Distress, h: Uncertainty and socioemotional learning, i: Satisfaction with life). This study suggests that the number of countries and scientific journals that have published on the impact of COVID-19 on constructs affecting college students' happiness is small. In addition, the most discussed subtopics during the pandemic were related to constructs such as psychological impact and stress affecting college students' happiness.

Analysis of shared research data in Spanish scientific papers about COVID-19: A first approach

During the coronavirus pandemic, changes in the way science is done and shared occurred, which motivates meta-research to help understand science communication in crises and improve its effectiveness. The objective is to study how many Spanish scientific papers on COVID-19 published during 2020 share their research data. Qualitative and descriptive study applying nine attributes: (a) availability, (b) accessibility, (c) format, (d) licensing, (e) linkage, (f) funding, (g) editorial policy, (h) content, and (i) statistics. We analyzed 1,340 papers, 1,173 (87.5%) did not have research data. A total of 12.5% share their research data of which 2.1% share their data in repositories, 5% share their data through a simple request, 0.2% do not have permission to share their data, and 5.2% share their data as supplementary material. There is a small percentage that shares their research data; however, it demonstrates the researchers' poor knowledge on how to properly share their research data and their lack of knowledge on what is research data.

What every researcher should know about searching - clarified concepts, search advice, and an agenda to improve finding in academia

We researchers have taken searching for information for granted for far too long. The COVID-19 pandemic shows us the boundaries of academic searching capabilities, both in terms of our know-how and of the systems we have. With hundreds of studies published daily on COVID-19, for example, we struggle to find, stay up-to-date, and synthesize information-all hampering evidence-informed decision making. This COVID-19 information crisis is indicative of the broader problem of information overloaded academic research. To improve our finding capabilities, we urgently need to improve how we search and the systems we use. We respond to Klopfenstein and Dampier (Res Syn Meth. 2020) who commented on our 2020 paper and proposed a way of improving PubMed's and Google Scholar's search functionalities. Our response puts their commentary in a larger frame and suggests how we can improve academic searching altogether. We urge that researchers need to understand that search skills require dedicated education and training. Better and more efficient searching requires an initial understanding of the different goals that define the way searching needs to be conducted. We explain the main types of searching that we academics routinely engage in; distinguishing lookup, exploratory, and systematic searching. These three types must be conducted using different search methods (heuristics) and using search systems with specific capabilities. To improve academic searching, we introduce the "Search Triangle" model emphasizing the importance of matching goals, heuristics, and systems. Further, we suggest an urgently needed agenda toward search literacy as the norm in academic research and fit-for-purpose search systems.