Analysis of peer reviewers' response to invitations by gender and geographical region: cohort study of manuscripts reviewed at 21 biomedical journals before and during covid-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To describe gender and geographical inequalities in invitations to review and the response to these invitations and to assess whether inequalities increased during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 19 specialist medical journals and two large general medical journals from BMJ Publishing Group. POPULATION: Reviewers invited to review manuscripts submitted between 1 January 2018 and 31 May 2021. The cohort was followed up to 28 February 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reviewer's agreement to review. RESULTS: A total of 257 025 reviewers were invited (38.6% (88 454/228 869) women), and 90 467 (35.2%) agreed to review. Invited reviewers were mainly (217 682; 84.7%) affiliated with high income countries: Europe (122 414; 47.6%), North America (66 931; 26.0%), Africa (25 735; 10.0%), Asia (22 693; 8.8%), Oceania (16 175; 6.3%), and South America (3076; 1.2%). Independent factors associated with agreement to review were gender (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 0.92, for women compared with men), geographical affiliation (2.89, 2.73 to 3.06, for Asia; 3.32, 2.94 to 3.75 for South America; 1.35, 1.27 to 1.43, for Oceania; and 0.35, 0.33 to 0.37, for Africa compared with Europe), and country income (0.47, 0.45 to 0.49, for upper middle income; 5.12, 4.67 to 5.61, for lower middle income; and 4.66, 3.79 to 5.73, for low income compared with high income country). Agreement was also independently associated with editor's gender (0.96, 0.93 to 0.99, for women compared with men), last author's geographical affiliation (0.80, 0.78 to 0.83, for Asia; 0.89, 0.85 to 0.94, for Oceania compared with Europe), impact factor (1.78, 1.27 to 2.50, for >10 compared with <5), and type of peer review process (0.52, 0.35 to 0.77, for open compared with anonymised). During the first and second phases of the pandemic, agreement was lower than in the pre-pandemic period (P<0.001). The interaction between time periods and covid-19 related topic and reviewer's gender was non-significant. However, significant interaction was found between time periods and covid-19 related topic and reviewer's geographical affiliation. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce bias and improve diversity, editors need to identify and implement effective strategies and continually evaluate progress against these to ensure that more women and researchers from upper middle income and low income countries are involved in review.

Publications on COVID-19 in radiology journals in 2020 and 2021: bibliometric citation and co-citation network analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has led to the rapid publication of numerous radiology articles, primarily focused on disease diagnosis. The objective of this study is to analyze the intellectual structure of radiology research on COVID-19 using a citation and co-citation analysis. METHODS: We identified all documents about COVID-19 published in radiology journals included in the Web of Science in the period 2020-2021, conducting a citation analysis. Then we identified all bibliographic references that were cited by these documents, generating a co-citation matrix that was used to perform a co-citation network. RESULTS: Of the 3418 documents indexed in WoS, 857 were initially "Early Access," 2223 had citations, 393 had more than 20 citations, and 83 had more than 100 citations. The USA had the highest number of publications (32.62%) and China had the highest rate of funded studies (45.38%). The three authors with the most publications were affiliated with Italian institutions, while the five most cited authors were Chinese. A total of 647 publications were co-cited at least 12 times and were published in 206 different journals, with 49% of the documents found in radiology journals. The institutions with the greatest presence among these co-cited articles were Chinese and American. CONCLUSION: This co-citation analysis is the first to focus exclusively on radiology articles on COVID-19. Our study confirms the existence of interrelated thematic clusters with different specific weights. KEY POINTS: • As the pandemic caused by SARS-Cov-2 has led to the rapid publication of numerous radiology studies in a short time period, a bibliometric review based on citation and co-citation analysis has been conducted. • The co-citation analysis supported the identification of key themes in the study of COVID-19 in radiology publications. • Many of the most co-cited articles belong to a heterogeneous group of publications, with authors from countries that are far apart and even from different disciplines.

The impact of COVID-19 on global health journals: an analysis of impact factor and publication trends.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has affected research productivity across all areas of knowledge. Current evidence suggests that COVID-19 has had a blockbuster effect on journal impact factors (JIFs) and publication trends, while little is known on global health journals. METHODS: Twenty global health journals were included to analyse the impact of COVID-19 on their JIFs and publication trends. Indicator data, including numbers of publications, citations, articles with different types, etc, were extracted from journal websites and Web of Science Core Collection database. The JIFs from 2019 to 2021 were simulated for longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses. Interrupted time-series analysis and non-parametric tests were applied to assess whether COVID-19 had decreased non-COVID-19 publications from January 2018 to June 2022. RESULTS: In 2020, 615 out of 3223 publications were COVID-19 related, accounting for 19.08%. The simulated JIFs of 17 out of 20 journals in 2021 were higher than those in 2019 and 2020. Notably, 18 out of 20 journals had a decrease in their simulated JIFs after excluding COVID-19-related publications. Moreover, 10 out of 20 journals decreased their monthly numbers of non-COVID-19 publications after the COVID-19 outbreak. For all the 20 journals as a whole, after the COVID-19 outbreak in February 2020, the total number of non-COVID-19 publications significantly decreased by 14.2 compared with the previous month (p=0.013), and since then, on average, the publications had decreased by 0.6 per month until June 2022 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has impacted the structure of COVID-19-related publications, the JIFs of global health journals and their numbers of non-COVID-19 publications. Although journals may benefit from increased JIFs, global health journals should avoid relying on a single metric. More follow-up studies including more years of data with a combination of metrics should be conducted to generate more robust evidence.

Crises in the Anthropocene.

2022 was a year of crises, not just one but multiple intersecting crises that caused traumatic stress in billions of people worldwide. COVID-19 is still not over. New wars have started, and the climate change impact is bigger than ever. Will the Anthropocene be an era of continued crises? This past year the European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) has again tried to contribute to how to prevent or treat the consequences of these major crises as well as other events and we will continue to do so the year to come. For instance, we will have special issues or collections addressing these big issues, such as climate change and traumatic stress, or early intervention after trauma or in times of conflict. In this editorial, we also present the past year's excellent journal metrics regarding reach, impact, and quality and the ESTSS EJPT award finalists for best paper of 2022 and look forward to 2023.

2022 was a year of multiple intersecting crises causing traumatic stress to billions of people around the world.European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to contribute to how to understand, prevent or treat the consequences of these major crises.EJPT's editorial team again achieved excellent journal metrics regarding reach, impact, and quality in 2022.

Research on COVID-19 and its influence on Latin American medical journals impact factor.

INTRODUCTION: The arrival of the pandemic caused by coronavirus disease (COVID-19) exponentially increased scientific production. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the influence of COVID-19-related scientific production on the impact factor values of Latin American medical journals. METHODS: Journals related to the Medicine categories included in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) were used. Impact factor data from the 2020 and 2021 editions were used to compare the citations received by documents related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A decrease in the impact factor values of the evaluated journals was observed when the citations received by works related to COVID-19 were eliminated. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of information published on COVID-19 and the citations received influenced the impact increase in 2021 JCR.

INTRODUCCIÓN: La llegada de la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19) incrementó exponencialmente la producción científica. OBJETIVO: Analizar la influencia de la producción científica acerca de COVID-19 en los valores del factor de impacto de revistas médicas latinoamericanas. MÉTODOS: Se emplearon las revistas de categorías relacionadas con la medicina del Journal Citation Reports (JCR). Se utilizaron los datos del factor del impacto de las ediciones de 2020 y 2021 para establecer una comparación respecto a las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. RESULTADOS: Se observó un descenso en los valores del factor de impacto de las revistas evaluadas cuando se eliminan las citas recibidas por los documentos relativos a COVID-19. CONCLUSIONES: El volumen de la información publicada sobre COVID-19 y las citas recibidas influyeron en el aumento del impacto en el JCR de 2021.

2021 Top Images in Radiology: Radiology In Training Editors' Choices.

Online supplemental material is available for this article.