Scholarly publishing and journal targeting in the time of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists and other specialists.
Scholarly publishing and journal targeting in the time of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists and other specialists.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00296-020-04718-x
复制
发表时间：
2020-12
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Misra DP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gupta L;Gasparyan AY;Zimba O;Misra DP
冠状病毒病2019年(新冠肺炎)大流行时代不断演变的研究格局要求更好地理解学者们对出版现状和未来的看法。通过社交媒体在风湿病专家和其他专家之间分发了一份匿名和有效的电子调查，其中包括30个问题，以了解在选择目标期刊、出版标准、商业编辑服务、印前存档、社交媒体和替代出版活动时的偏好。在108名受访者中，相当大的比例是临床医生(68%)、研究人员(60%)和教育工作者(47%)，他们发表了23篇论文，取得了15项同行评议成果。受访者主要是来自印度、乌克兰和土耳其的风湿病专家。在选择目标期刊时，与所在领域的相关性(69%)、PubMed中央存档(61%)和免费出版(59%)是主要因素。39名受访者(36%)声称，他们经常针对当地期刊发表他们的研究成果。然而，只有18人(17%)认为他们当地的社会期刊是值得信赖的。偶尔在所谓的掠夺性期刊上发表文章(5.5%)，获得商业编辑机构的支持以提高英语和数据表达并不少见(23%，21%)。关于预印本存档的意见存在争议；只有三分之一的人认为预印本有用。高质量的同行评审(56%)、完全和立即开放获取(46%)和出版后社交媒体推广(32%)被确定为学术出版在可预见的未来的主要预期特征。接受调查的学者的这些看法呼吁更多地获得自由出版的机会，注意正确使用英语和编辑技能，并在社交媒体上发挥更大的作用。
The evolving research landscape in the time of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic calls for greater understanding of the perceptions of scholars regarding the current state and future of publishing. An anonymised and validated e-survey featuring 30 questions was circulated among rheumatologists and other specialists over social media to understand preferences while choosing target journals, publishing standards, commercial editing services, preprint archiving, social media and alternative publication activities. Of 108 respondents, a significant proportion were clinicians (68%), researchers (60%) and educators (47%), with median 23 publications and 15 peer-review accomplishments. The respondents were mainly rheumatologists from India, Ukraine and Turkey. While choosing target journals, relevance to their field (69%), PubMed Central archiving (61%) and free publishing (59%) were the major factors. Thirty-nine surveyees (36%) claimed that they often targeted local journals for publishing their research. However, only 18 (17%) perceived their local society journals as trustworthy. Occasional publication in the so-called predatory journals (5, 5%) was reported and obtaining support from commercial editing agencies to improve English and data presentation was not uncommon (23, 21%). The opinion on preprint archiving was disputed; only one-third believed preprints were useful. High-quality peer review (56%), full and immediate open access (46%) and post-publication social media promotion (32%) were identified as key anticipated features of scholarly publishing in the foreseeable future. These perceptions of surveyed scholars call for greater access to free publishing, attention to proper usage of English and editing skills, and a larger role for engagement over social media.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1016/j.apmr.2017.01.002
发表时间：
2017-05-01
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Manca, Andrea;Martinez, Gianluca;Deriu, Franca
通讯作者：
Deriu, Franca
影响因子：
4
作者：
Haldule, Saloni;Davalbhakta, Samira;Agarwal, Vikas
通讯作者：
Agarwal, Vikas
影响因子：
4
作者：
Misra, Durga Prasanna;Ravindran, Vinod;Negi, Vir Singh
通讯作者：
Negi, Vir Singh
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Yakhontova, Tatyana
通讯作者：
Yakhontova, Tatyana
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Gasparyan, Armen Yuri;Yessirkepov, Marlen;Kitas, George D.
通讯作者：
Kitas, George D.