Revistas biomedicas / Biomedic journals

Diciembre 14,  2016. No. 2538

Mega revistas con acceso abierto. Un perfil bibliométrico Open-Access Mega-Journals: A Bibliometric Profile. Wakeling S1, Willett P1, Creaser C2, Fry J3, Pinfield S1, Spezi V2. PLoS One. 2016 Nov 18;11(11):e0165359. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165359. eCollection 2016. Abstract In this paper we present the first comprehensive bibliometric analysis of eleven open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs are a relatively recent phenomenon, and have been characterised as having four key characteristics: large size; broad disciplinary scope; a Gold-OA business model; and a peer-review policy that seeks to determine only the scientific soundness of the research rather than evaluate the novelty or significance of the work. Our investigation focuses on four key modes of analysis: journal outputs (the number of articles published and changes in output over time); OAMJ author characteristics (nationalities and institutional affiliations); subject areas (the disciplinary scope of OAMJs, and variations in sub-disciplinary output); and citation profiles (the citation distributions of each OAMJ, and the impact of citing journals). We found that while the total output of the eleven mega-journals grew by 14.9% between 2014 and 2015, this growth is largely attributable to the increased output of Scientific Reports and Medicine. We also found substantial variation in the geographical distribution of authors. Several journals have a relatively high proportion of Chinese authors, and we suggest this may be linked to these journals' high Journal Impact Factors (JIFs). The mega-journals were also found to vary in subject scope, with several journals publishing disproportionately high numbers of articles in certain sub-disciplines. Our citation analsysis offers support for Björk & Catani's suggestion that OAMJs's citation distributions can be similar to those of traditional journals, while noting considerable variation in citation rates across the eleven titles. We conclude that while the OAMJ term is useful as a means of grouping journals which share a set of key characteristics, there is no such thing as a "typical" mega-journal, and we suggest several areas for additional research that might help us better understand the current and future role of OAMJs in scholarly communication. PDF Una revisión de alcance de competencias para editores científicos de revistas biomédicas. A scoping review of competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals. Galipeau J1, Barbour V2, Baskin P3, Bell-Syer S4, Cobey K5, Cumpston M6, Deeks J7, Garner P8, MacLehose H9, Shamseer L5, Straus S10, Tugwell P5,11, Wager E12, Winker M13, Moher D5,12. BMC Med. 2016 Feb 2;14:16. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0561-2. Abstract BACKGROUND: Biomedical journals are the main route for disseminating the results of health-related research. Despite this, their editors operate largely without formal training or certification. To our knowledge, no body of literature systematically identifying core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals exists. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a scoping review to determine what is known on the competency requirements for scientific editors of biomedical journals. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE®, Cochrane Library, Embase®, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and ERIC databases (from inception to November 2014) and conducted a grey literature search for research and non-research articles with competency-related statements (i.e. competencies, knowledge, skills, behaviors, and tasks) pertaining to the role of scientific editors of peer-reviewed health-related journals. We also conducted an environmental scan, searched the results of a previous environmental scan, and searched the websites of existing networks, major biomedical journal publishers, and organizations that offer resources for editors. RESULTS: A total of 225 full-text publications were included, 25 of which were research articles. We extracted a total of 1,566 statements possibly related to core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals from these publications. We then collated overlapping or duplicate statements which produced a list of 203 unique statements. Finally, we grouped these statements into seven emergent themes: (1) dealing with authors, (2) dealing with peer reviewers, (3) journal publishing, (4) journal promotion, (5) editing, (6) ethics and integrity, and (7) qualities and characteristics of editors. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this scoping review is the first attempt to systematically identify possible competencies of editors. Limitations are that (1) we may not have captured all aspects of a biomedical editor's work in our searches, (2) removing redundant and overlapping items may have led to the elimination of some nuances between items, (3) restricting to certain databases, and only French and English publications, may have excluded relevant publications, and (4) some statements may not necessarily be competencies. CONCLUSION: This scoping review is the first step of a program to develop a minimum set of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals which will be followed by a training needs assessment, a Delphi exercise, and a consensus meeting. PDF Regional Anesthesiology and Acute Pain Medicine Meeting April 6-8, 2017, San Francisco, California, USA ASRA American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Información / Information California Society of Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting April 27-30, 2017 San Francisco California Información / Information

Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor 52 664 6848905 vwhizar@anestesia-dolor.org anestesia-dolor.org Copyright © 2015