Scientific authorship in neurosurgery

INTRODUCTION

Assessment of scientific bibliographic production is a complex issue, mainly based on the impact factor (IF) of the journals and the h index, that quantifies the number of cites an author receives. In order to estimate the bibliographic production and the influence of co-authorship among Spanish neurosurgeons, we performed a PubMed search aimed to identify all papers published by a sample of neurosurgeons.

METHODS

Cross-sectional observational and regional study. We identified a sample of 183 neurosurgeons from Madrid and Castilla y León Autonomous Communities. The bibliometric information was gathered in March 2022 via PubMed free access website. For each author we registered the type of journal, total number of articles, order of appearance in the authors' list, total IF, the proportion of articles signed as first or second author (Personal Authorship Quotient [PAQ]) and the percentage of IF attributable to those articles (Personal Impact Quotient [PIQ]).

RESULTS

A total of 3,592 articles from 183 authors were published in 412 different journals, of which only 9.9% were pure neurosurgical journals. Only 17 neurosurgeons (9,3%) had published at least one article as unique author. The average number of articles per neurosurgeon was 20 (median 9) of which 57.7% were published in neurosurgical journals, and 22,2% in Neurocirugía (official publication of the SENEC). The average PAQ was 0.367 (median 0.364) and the average PIQ was 0.317 (median 0.251). Both proportions tended to decrease as the number of publications increased.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, Spanish neurosurgeons publish half of their articles in neurosurgical journals, appear as first or second author in one third of the cases, and the IF attributable to these papers comprise 25% of the total IF. The PAQ and PIQ provide bibliometric information that minimizes the enlarging effect on curriculum of massive co-authorship and allow comparisons among authors and different scientific fields.

Analysis of gender in the authorship of the scientific publications of the Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española in the last decade

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, progress has been made in tackling inequality between men and women, encouraging publications that analyse and provide recommendations to eliminate this issue. The aim of this study is to analyse the gender differences in the authorship of the studies published in the journal Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of issues published between January 2010 and December 2019, including number of authors (total, men and women), type and year of publication, institution and country (first, second and last author), and area of specialisation. Women's participation was calculated based on female/male ratio, trend and associated factors.

RESULTS

A total of 615 articles with 2,841 authors (1,017 women and 1,824 men) from Spain were collected. A total of 244 (39.7%) women and 371 (60.3%) men were listed as first authors (p = .879), 245 (39.84%) women and 370 (60.16%) men as second authors (p = .919), and 137 (22.28%) women and 478 (77.72%) men as final signatories (p < .000). All the ratios calculated were below the recommended figures.

DISCUSSION

The participation of female authors in the scientific production of Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española is acceptable, following a similar distribution to the current number of female ENT specialists. Further efforts are needed to increase the number of final signatories and to change the decreasing trend recorded over the last decade.

[How to publish in pediatrics journals with impact factor: Role of open access journals]

To publish articles in prestigious scientific journals is not a simple task, particularly because of three main reasons: the difficulty for designing and performing competitive and high quality research, the high rates of rejection in most high-impact journals, and the absence of systematized training in the methodology of biomedical publications in the curricular programs. If to this is added the progressive complexity of the instructions for authors and the formal requirements that most journals impose, it is logical that there is discouragement among potential authors. On the other hand, the pressure and the demand for authorship of scientific articles to be able to get academic and professional positions of a certain level are increasing. However, what at first glance seems a gloomy perspective, it is not so much if some key aspects related to the structure and writing of manuscripts and the systematics of the editorial process of the journals are known and applied, which, in short, continue being in force since the aphorism «publish or perish» became popular at the beginning of the last century. As described in this article, the steps to follow are straightforward, logical, and interrelated, so getting off to a good start and completing the various stages properly and in the right order always represents a clear advantage in ensuring the final success of having your paper accepted.

Analysis of gender in the authorship of the scientific publications of the Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española in the last decade

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, progress has been made in tackling inequality between men and women, encouraging publications that analyse and provide recommendations to eliminate this issue. The aim of this study is to analyse the gender differences in the authorship of the studies published in the journal Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of issues published between January 2010 and December 2019, including number of authors (total, men and women), type and year of publication, institution and country (first, second and last author), and area of specialisation. Women's participation was calculated based on female/male ratio, trend and associated factors.

RESULTS

A total of 615 articles with 2,841 authors (1,017 women and 1,824 men) from Spain were collected. A total of 244 (39.7%) women and 371 (60.3%) men were listed as first authors (P=.879), 245 (39.84%) women and 370 (60.16%) men as second authors (P=.919), and 137 (22.28%) women and 478 (77.72%) men as final signatories (P<.000). All the ratios calculated were below the recommended figures.

DISCUSSION

The participation of female authors in the scientific production of Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española is acceptable, following a similar distribution to the current number of female ENT specialists. Further efforts are needed to increase the number of final signatories and to change the decreasing trend recorded over the last decade.

Interdisciplinarity: An essential requirement for translation of radiomics research into clinical practice -a systematic review focused on thoracic oncology

BACKGROUND

Recently, evidence has accumulated that demonstrates the potential for future applications of radiomics in many clinical settings, including thoracic oncology. Methodological reasons for the immaturity of image mining (radiomics and artificial intelligence-based) studies have been identified. However, data on the influence of the composition of the research team on the quality of investigations in radiomics are lacking.

AIM

This review aims to evaluate the interdisciplinarity within studies on radiomics in thoracic oncology in order to assess its influence on the quality of research (QUADAS-2 score) in the image mining field.

METHODS

We considered for inclusion radiomics investigations with objectives relating to clinical practice in thoracic oncology. Subsequently, we interviewed the corresponding authors. The field of expertise and/or educational degree was then used to assess interdisciplinarity. Subsequently, all studies were evaluated applying the QUADAS-2 score and assigned to a research phase from 0 to IV.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 studies were included. The study quality according to the QUADAS-2 score was low (score ≤5) in 8, moderate (=6) in 12, and high (≥7) in 7 papers. An interdisciplinary team (at least 3 different expertise categories) was involved in half of the papers without any type of validation and in all papers with independent validation. Clinicians were not involved in phase 0 studies while they contributed to all papers classified as phase I and to 4/5 papers classified as phase II with independent validation.

CONCLUSIONS

The composition of the research team influences the quality of investigations in radiomics. Also, growth in interdisciplinarity appears to reflect research development from the early phase to a more mature, clinically oriented stage of investigation.

[Bibliometric analysis of female authorship in original articles in the journal ATENCIÓN PRIMARIA]

OBJECTIVES

To determine the percentage of female authors in original articles published during 2periods, in the journal of Atención Primaria (Primary Care), and to examine the differences between the categories of authorship (first, last author, and co-author) between both periods.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Feminine scientific production published during the periods 2007-2008 and 2017-2018.

PARTICIPANTS

The study was focused on original articles.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

The following variables were collected in an ad hoc form: gender based on the name of the author, total number of women and men appearing as authors, and order of authorship. Absolute and relative authorship frequencies were calculated, and the χ² test was used to examine the evolution of the percentages by type of authorship and gender.

RESULTS

A total of 108 articles were analysed in 2007-2008, and 100 in 2017-2018. No statistically significant differences were observed between the mean numbers of women authors within and between periods. In 2007-2008 a total of 548 female authors were identified and 540 in 2017-2018, the percentage of female authors was 48.7% and 54.4%, respectively. Only an increase in the percentage of first authors was observed between periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Practically one out of every 2authors of original articles published in the journal Atención Primaria was female. There was also a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors between the 2periods. Nevertheless, and despite the greater number of health workers, the number of latest female authors remain unchanged, which points to the persistence of female under-representation.

Data Sharing: A New Editorial Initiative of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Implications for the Editors' Network

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) provides recommendations to improve the editorial standards and scientific quality of biomedical journals. These recommendations range from uniform technical requirements to more complex and elusive editorial issues including ethical aspects of the scientific process. Recently, registration of clinical trials, conflicts of interest disclosure, and new criteria for authorship - emphasizing the importance of responsibility and accountability -, have been proposed. Last year, a new editorial initiative to foster sharing of clinical trial data was launched. This review discusses this novel initiative with the aim of increasing awareness among readers, investigators, authors and editors belonging to the Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology.