Where should I send it? Optimizing the submission decision process

Top 100 Pemphigus Papers of the Highest Citation: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background

There have been several papers published about pemphigus. Bibliometric analysis is useful in determining the most significant research in a certain topic. By bibliometric research, we were able to determine the 100 most frequently reference articles in pemphigus.

Aims and Objective

Using bibliometric tools to find and evaluate the top 100 most reference papers in pemphigus.

Materials and Methods

On 19 February 2023, the Web of Science database was utilized to launch a title-specific search. Publications were listed in degrading order on the basis of their total citations. We examined the top 100 most reference pemphigus publications.

Results

The years of publication varied from 1971 to 2020, with the 1990s being the most active. According to diverse study objectives, the 100 publications were separated into clinical aspects and diagnosis (20%), pathophysiology (52%), therapy (13%), epidemiology (8%), related disorders (1%) and others (6%). The 100 papers were published in 37 different publications. The top 100 reference articles included 54 first authors of 11 nations, most of whom came from North America and Europe. Stanley, J R, from Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, was the principal author.

Conclusions

A thorough bibliometric research of the top 100 publications in pemphigus was provided by the research, which may be useful for future research.

Predicting future publishing success among sociologists at time of hire in the US Higher education system

This article assesses the characteristics of faculty members’ publishing records at the start of a first assistant professor position in order to predict their continued publication productivity. Using data from nearly 500 US-based sociologists, we examine how indicators, such as number of published articles, the extent of sole authorship, journal placement, and doctoral pedigree, predict success in publishing. After accounting for year of PhD, primary research methodology, and demographic characteristics, the analysis finds that the total number of articles published at the time of hire is not a significant predictor of future productivity. But the number of sole-authored articles published at the time of hire is positively associated with subsequent publication. The analysis also finds that doctoral pedigree is negatively associated with the total number of articles published post-hire but positively associated with publishing in top sociology journals. The authors suggest that faculty with different doctoral origins pursue varied publishing ‘scripts’ in their careers. Sole authorship operates as a potent trigger at career onset for cumulative advantage. In the context of the reward system of science, a moral community identifies early solo work as a sign of work prowess, which begets further publishing success.

The impact of radiomics for human papillomavirus status prediction in oropharyngeal cancer: systematic review and radiomics quality score assessment

Purpose

Human papillomavirus (HPV) status assessment is crucial for decision making in oropharyngeal cancer patients. In last years, several articles have been published investigating the possible role of radiomics in distinguishing HPV-positive from HPV-negative neoplasms. Aim of this review was to perform a systematic quality assessment of radiomic studies published on this topic.

Methods

Radiomics studies on HPV status prediction in oropharyngeal cancer patients were selected. The Radiomic Quality Score (RQS) was assessed by three readers to evaluate their methodological quality. In addition, possible correlations between RQS% and journal type, year of publication, impact factor, and journal rank were investigated.

Results

After the literature search, 19 articles were selected whose RQS median was 33% (range 0–42%). Overall, 16/19 studies included a well-documented imaging protocol, 13/19 demonstrated phenotypic differences, and all were compared with the current gold standard. No study included a public protocol, phantom study, or imaging at multiple time points. More than half (13/19) included feature selection and only 2 were comprehensive of non-radiomic features. Mean RQS was significantly higher in clinical journals.

Conclusion

Radiomics has been proposed for oropharyngeal cancer HPV status assessment, with promising results. However, these are supported by low methodological quality investigations. Further studies with higher methodological quality, appropriate standardization, and greater attention to validation are necessary prior to clinical adoption.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00234-022-02959-0.

Time to publish? Turnaround times, acceptance rates, and impact factors of journals in fisheries science

Selecting a target journal is a universal decision faced by authors of scientific papers. Components of the decision, including expected turnaround time, journal acceptance rate, and journal impact factor, vary in terms of accessibility. In this study, I collated recent turnaround times and impact factors for 82 journals that publish papers in the field of fisheries sciences. In addition, I gathered acceptance rates for the same journals when possible. Findings indicated clear among-journal differences in turnaround time, with median times-to-publication ranging from 79 to 323 days. There was no clear correlation between turnaround time and acceptance rate nor between turnaround time and impact factor; however, acceptance rate and impact factor were negatively correlated. I found no field-wide differences in turnaround time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, though some individual journals took significantly longer or significantly shorter to publish during the pandemic. Depending on their priorities, authors choosing a target journal should use the results of this study as guidance toward a more informed decision.

Research Interest and Public Interest in Melanoma: A Bibliometric and Google Trends Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Melanoma is a severe skin cancer that metastasizes quickly. Bibliometric analysis can quantify hotspots of research interest. Google Trends can provide information to address public concerns.

METHODS

The top 15 most frequently cited articles on melanoma each year from 2015 to 2019, according to annual citations, were retrieved from the Web of Science database. Original articles, reviews, and research letters were included in this research. For the Google Trends analysis, the topic "Melanoma" was selected as the keyword. Online search data from 2004 to 2019 were collected. Four countries (New Zealand, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom) were selected for seasonal analysis. Annual trends in relative search volume and seasonal variation were analyzed, and the top related topics and rising related topics were also selected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The top 15 most frequently cited articles each year were all original articles that focused on immunotherapy (n=8), omics (n=5), and the microbiome (n=2). The average relative search volume remained relatively stable across the years. The seasonal variation analysis revealed that the peak appeared in summer, and the valley appeared in winter. The diseases associated with or manifestations of melanoma, treatment options, risk factors, diagnostic tools, and prognosis were the topics in which the public was most interested. Most of the topics revealed by bibliometric and Google Trends analyses were consistent, with the exception of issues related to the molecular biology of melanoma.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed the trends in research interest and public interest in melanoma, which may pave the way for further research.

How much is my paper worth?

For scientific research to have an impact, its findings need to be communicated. Usually, such communications take the form of published papers in a journal. Given that most papers are rarely cited, yet consume a great deal of a scientist’s time, treasure, and talent, the value of scientific publication as an enterprise merits consideration. What is a paper really worth? In this Perspective, I consider three potential values: career, science, and society.

A multi-objective decision-making approach to the journal submission problem

When researchers complete a manuscript, they need to choose a journal to which they will submit the study. This decision requires to navigate trade-offs between multiple objectives. One objective is to share the new knowledge as widely as possible. Citation counts can serve as a proxy to quantify this objective. A second objective is to minimize the time commitment put into sharing the research, which may be estimated by the total time from initial submission to final decision. A third objective is to minimize the number of rejections and resubmissions. Thus, researchers often consider the trade-offs between the objectives of (i) maximizing citations, (ii) minimizing time-to-decision, and (iii) minimizing the number of resubmissions. To complicate matters further, this is a decision with multiple, potentially conflicting, decision-maker rationalities. Co-authors might have different preferences, for example about publishing fast versus maximizing citations. These diverging preferences can lead to conflicting trade-offs between objectives. Here, we apply a multi-objective decision analytical framework to identify the Pareto-front between these objectives and determine the set of journal submission pathways that balance these objectives for three stages of a researcher's career. We find multiple strategies that researchers might pursue, depending on how they value minimizing risk and effort relative to maximizing citations. The sequences that maximize expected citations within each strategy are generally similar, regardless of time horizon. We find that the "conditional impact factor"-impact factor times acceptance rate-is a suitable heuristic method for ranking journals, to strike a balance between minimizing effort objectives and maximizing citation count. Finally, we examine potential co-author tension resulting from differing rationalities by mapping out each researcher's preferred Pareto front and identifying compromise submission strategies. The explicit representation of trade-offs, especially when multiple decision-makers (co-authors) have different preferences, facilitates negotiations and can support the decision process.

Publication lag and early view effects in information science journals

Purpose

A major problem in today’s scholarly publishing process is the long tails for the assignment of volume and issue numbers for approved articles. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which information science journals offer early view features and the effects of these features.

Design/methodology/approach

The study addresses three basic questions: Do the articles approved for publication in information science journals appear in the online platforms of these journals before the assignment of volume and issue numbers? How long do the articles wait in the online platforms before they get the volume and issue numbers? Is there a statistically significant relationship between the online accessing numbers of the articles before they are published and bibliometric indicators?

Findings

More than half of the information science journals complete the editorial process in reasonable durations and share new articles with their readers before publishing them. In some journals, there are articles that wait for more than a year to be assigned volume and issue numbers after the completion of the editorial process. There are statistically significant differences, in terms of both their impact factor and immediacy index values, between the journals that offer early view features and those that do not. Both the impact factor and the immediacy index values of the journals that provide early view are higher than the others.

Practical implications

Adopting the early view policy may significantly help increase the impact factor and immediacy index values of the journals, as well as the visibility of their contents

Originality/value

The answers to this study’s research questions offer a new perspective to overcome the challenges in the processes through which scientific products meet with their users.

How to Rank Journals

There are now many methods available to assess the relative citation performance of peer-reviewed journals. Regardless of their individual faults and advantages, citation-based metrics are used by researchers to maximize the citation potential of their articles, and by employers to rank academic track records. The absolute value of any particular index is arguably meaningless unless compared to other journals, and different metrics result in divergent rankings. To provide a simple yet more objective way to rank journals within and among disciplines, we developed a κ-resampled composite journal rank incorporating five popular citation indices: Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, Source-Normalized Impact Per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank and Google 5-year h-index; this approach provides an index of relative rank uncertainty. We applied the approach to six sample sets of scientific journals from Ecology (n = 100 journals), Medicine (n = 100), Multidisciplinary (n = 50); Ecology + Multidisciplinary (n = 25), Obstetrics & Gynaecology (n = 25) and Marine Biology & Fisheries (n = 25). We then cross-compared the κ-resampled ranking for the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set to the results of a survey of 188 publishing ecologists who were asked to rank the same journals, and found a 0.68–0.84 Spearman’s ρ correlation between the two rankings datasets. Our composite index approach therefore approximates relative journal reputation, at least for that discipline. Agglomerative and divisive clustering and multi-dimensional scaling techniques applied to the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set identified specific clusters of similarly ranked journals, with only Nature & Science separating out from the others. When comparing a selection of journals within or among disciplines, we recommend collecting multiple citation-based metrics for a sample of relevant and realistic journals to calculate the composite rankings and their relative uncertainty windows.