学术出版中不断提高的定量生产率和读者群的变化:从猴痘文献中获得的文献计量学启示。

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS
Nityanand Jain, Andrei Tanasov, Swarali Yatin Chodnekar, Akvilė Rakauskaitė, Edouard Lansiaux, Sandra Skuja, Aigars Reinis
{"title":"学术出版中不断提高的定量生产率和读者群的变化:从猴痘文献中获得的文献计量学启示。","authors":"Nityanand Jain, Andrei Tanasov, Swarali Yatin Chodnekar, Akvilė Rakauskaitė, Edouard Lansiaux, Sandra Skuja, Aigars Reinis","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2199159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The sudden spread of the monkeypox virus has been accompanied by an increase in the scientific interest in the virus. More than 1,400 PubMed-indexed documents have been authored by about 5,800 unique authors, averaging around 120 publications per month. This sheer rise in the number led us to explore the content published in the literature. We discovered more than 30% of the documents are Quantitative Productivity (QP) i.e., papers that illustrate the emerging trends of parachute concerns, modified salami tactics, cyclic recycling, and excellence in redundancy. In addition, we found few common hyper-prolific authors previously identified in the COVID-19 literature. Further, we share our experience in publishing monkeypox literature and highlight the growing readership and citation interest in editorials, commentaries, and correspondences that were thought to be uncitable in the medical literature. As long as the scientific community and public demand, the supply of such papers will continue, with no responsibility on the authors, journals, or the reader. Since overhauling the current system is an arduous task, we propose the optimization of existing retrieval services that would selectively filter documents based on article type (requires standardization of definitions) to dilute the crowding out effects of quantitative productivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1128-1151"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rising quantitative productivity and shifting readership in academic publishing: Bibliometric insights from monkeypox literature.\",\"authors\":\"Nityanand Jain, Andrei Tanasov, Swarali Yatin Chodnekar, Akvilė Rakauskaitė, Edouard Lansiaux, Sandra Skuja, Aigars Reinis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08989621.2023.2199159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The sudden spread of the monkeypox virus has been accompanied by an increase in the scientific interest in the virus. More than 1,400 PubMed-indexed documents have been authored by about 5,800 unique authors, averaging around 120 publications per month. This sheer rise in the number led us to explore the content published in the literature. We discovered more than 30% of the documents are Quantitative Productivity (QP) i.e., papers that illustrate the emerging trends of parachute concerns, modified salami tactics, cyclic recycling, and excellence in redundancy. In addition, we found few common hyper-prolific authors previously identified in the COVID-19 literature. Further, we share our experience in publishing monkeypox literature and highlight the growing readership and citation interest in editorials, commentaries, and correspondences that were thought to be uncitable in the medical literature. As long as the scientific community and public demand, the supply of such papers will continue, with no responsibility on the authors, journals, or the reader. Since overhauling the current system is an arduous task, we propose the optimization of existing retrieval services that would selectively filter documents based on article type (requires standardization of definitions) to dilute the crowding out effects of quantitative productivity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1128-1151\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2199159\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2199159","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着猴痘病毒的突然传播,科学界对该病毒的兴趣也随之增加。约有 5,800 名作者撰写了 1,400 多篇 PubMed 索引文献,平均每月发表约 120 篇文献。这一数字的增长促使我们对文献中发表的内容进行探索。我们发现,30% 以上的文献是量化生产力(QP),即说明降落伞关注、改良腊肠战术、循环再利用和卓越冗余等新兴趋势的论文。此外,我们还发现 COVID-19 文献中很少有以前发现过的共同的高产作者。此外,我们还分享了我们在猴痘文献出版方面的经验,并强调了在医学文献中被认为不可引用的社论、评论和通讯中日益增长的读者和引用兴趣。只要科学界和公众有需求,这类论文的供应就会持续下去,作者、期刊和读者都无需承担任何责任。由于彻底改革现有系统是一项艰巨的任务,我们建议优化现有的检索服务,根据文章类型(需要定义标准化)有选择性地过滤文献,以淡化定量生产力的挤出效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rising quantitative productivity and shifting readership in academic publishing: Bibliometric insights from monkeypox literature.

The sudden spread of the monkeypox virus has been accompanied by an increase in the scientific interest in the virus. More than 1,400 PubMed-indexed documents have been authored by about 5,800 unique authors, averaging around 120 publications per month. This sheer rise in the number led us to explore the content published in the literature. We discovered more than 30% of the documents are Quantitative Productivity (QP) i.e., papers that illustrate the emerging trends of parachute concerns, modified salami tactics, cyclic recycling, and excellence in redundancy. In addition, we found few common hyper-prolific authors previously identified in the COVID-19 literature. Further, we share our experience in publishing monkeypox literature and highlight the growing readership and citation interest in editorials, commentaries, and correspondences that were thought to be uncitable in the medical literature. As long as the scientific community and public demand, the supply of such papers will continue, with no responsibility on the authors, journals, or the reader. Since overhauling the current system is an arduous task, we propose the optimization of existing retrieval services that would selectively filter documents based on article type (requires standardization of definitions) to dilute the crowding out effects of quantitative productivity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信