How to be a good reviewer: A step-by-step guide for approaching peer review of a scientific manuscript.

Objectives: The peer review process is critical to maintaining quality, reliability, novelty, and innovation in the scientific literature. However, the teaching of scientific peer review is rarely a component of formal scientific or clinical training, and even the most experienced peer reviewers express interest in continuing education. The objective of this review article is to summarize the collective perspectives of experienced journal editors about how to be a good reviewer in a step-by-step guide that can serve as a resource for the performance of peer review of a scientific manuscript. Methods: This is a narrative review. Results: A review of the history and an overview of the modern-day peer review process are provided with attention to the role played by the reviewer, including important reasons for involvement in scientific peer review. The general components of a scientific peer review are described, and a model for how to structure a peer review report is provided. These concepts are also summarized in a reviewer checklist that can be used in real-time to develop and double-check one's reviewer report before submitting it. Conclusions: Peer review is a critically important service for maintaining quality in the scientific literature. Peer review of a scientific manuscript and the associated reviewer's report should assess specific details related to the accuracy, validity, novelty, and interpretation of a study's results. We hope that this article will serve as a resource and guide for reviewers of all levels of experience in the performance of peer review of a scientific manuscript.

Publication of pediatric theses defended at the Tunis Faculty of Medicine: A 15-year study.

INTRODUCTION: The valorisation of thesis through its publication is necessary to enhance its visibility. Few data exist concerning the characteristics of theses defended at the Tunis faculty of medicine. AIM: Examine the publication rate of pediatric theses and identify factors associated with an increased publication rate. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive bibliometric study of pediatric theses defended at the Faculty of Medicine of Tunis over 15 years, from 2006 to 2020. Theses were retrieved from the catalog of the faculty library. Publications had been searched in databases "Pub Med ", and "Google Scholar" until December2021. RESULTS: The study involved 235 pediatric theses. Sixty-eight theses were published, representing 29% of the total. The main topics of published theses were neonatology (16%) and hematology (15%). The language of publication was French and English in 55% and 45% of cases, respectively. All publications in Q1 and Q2 journals were written in English. The only independent factor predicting publication of theses was the very honourable mention with congratulations of the jury and proposal for the thesis prize (p=0,007). CONCLUSION: Additional assessments will be necessary to identify the obstacles to the publication of theses.

"On the ruins of seriality": The scientific journal and the nature of the scientific life.

Twenty-first-century discourse on science has been marked by narratives of crisis. Science is said to be experiencing crises of public trust, of peer review and publishing, of reproducibility and replicability, and of recognition and reward. The dominant response has been to "repair" the scientific literature and the system of scientific publishing through open science. This paper places the current predicament of scholarly communication in historical perspective by exploring the evolution of the scientific journal in the second half of the twentieth century. I focus on a new genre of scientific journal invented by Dutch commercial publishers shortly after World War II, and on its effects on the nature of the scientific life. I show that profit-oriented publishers and discipline-building scientists worked together to make postwar science more open, while also arguing that formats of scientific publication have their own agency.

JOURNAL AMHA - ACTA MEDICO-HISTORICA ADRIATICA

In this paper, the first 20 years of publication of the scientific journal AMHA - Acta medico-historica Adriatica (2002-2022) are presented and analysed. This journal has undoubtedly become and remained the central activity of the Croatian Scientific Society for the History of Health Culture, which has rapidly evolved into a globally esteemed journal in the history of medicine. The beginning and the context of publishing the journal with reference to the scientific conference "Rijeka and Its Citizens in Medical History" are presented, as well as the journal's profiling into a distinguished international scientific journal, co-publishing with the Faculty of Medicine (University of Rijeka) and its fast development in the later years. The analysis shows the growth of the journal's visibility through indexation in different international journal databases, the number and ratio of scientific articles and the variety of published material. Finally, a review of the potential future directions of development and the significance of this journal within the national, regional and international context is given.

Female representation among editorial boards of social, clinical, and educational pharmacy journals.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies on editorial team members of healthcare journals have been showing disparities in this distribution. However, there are limited data with respect to pharmacy journals. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the distribution of women among editorial board members of social, clinical, and educational pharmacy research journals around the globe. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between September and October 2022. Data were extracted from Scimago Journal & Country Rank and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science Journal Citation Reports The top 10 journals in each region of the world (continents) were analyzed. Editorial board members were categorized into four groups and determined based on information available on the journal's website. The sex was classified in binary form through name and photography, the personal and institutional web pages, or the Genderize program. RESULTS: A total of 45 journals were identified in the databases, of which 42 of them were analyzed. We identified 1482 editorial board members with only 527 (35.6%) being female. Analyzing the subgroups, there were 47 total editors-in-chief, 44 total co-editors, 272 associate editors, and 1119 editorial advisors. Of these, 10 (21.27%), 21 (47.72%), 115 (42.27%), and 381 (34.04%) were female, respectively. Only 9 journals (21.42%) presented more females among their editorial board members. CONCLUSION: A notable sex disparity among social, clinical, and educational pharmacy journals' editorial board members was identified. Efforts should be made to involve more female sex in their editorial teams.

A century of the Journal of Helminthology.

The Journal of Helminthology (JHL) was first published in 1923 and was originally created as a house journal of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The JHL was devised by its first Editor, Robert Leiper, to allow for rapid publication of results from the Department of Helminthology and its offshoot the Institute of Agricultural Parasitology. From this initial narrow focus the JHL has subsequently become not only internationally recognized but also retained its original emphasis on morphological, taxonomic and life cycle studies while embracing the emergence of new fields and technological advancements. The present review covers the historical development of the JHL over the last century from 1923 to 2023.

Peer review? No thanks!

The peer review process is an inalienable necessity in the modern scientific world. Published manuscripts are founded on feedback, a process in which reviewers evaluate the scientific values of the submitted paper and provide comments and criticisms. The aim of this process is to assist authors by improving their papers, to promote good science. The peer-review process can be represented as a hurdle race with the ultimate prize of innovative accurate scientific knowledge being published. In this process, we have on the one side the authors and originators of ideas and on the other editors and reviewers. In the process of publishing a scientific article, it is important to respect the time and efforts of both actors.

[The different models of scientific journals]. / Les différents modèles de revues scientifiques.

Introduction: Scientific journals are the main source of scientific data, ensuring their registration, validation, distribution and archiving. With over 2.6 million scientific articles published each year, the turnover of scientific journals exceeds $25 billion annually. Five publishers share nearly half of this lucrative market. Scientists are the key players in the process, but other stakeholders have gradually been introduced, building various business models whose similarities and differences are described here. Concepts underlying scientific publication: Open access to scientific papers dates back to the scientific and technical revolution of the 17th century. However, its evolution has been considerably boosted by the development of the Internet and the recognition of science as "commons".Scientific integrity is under the control of research institutions to ensure the prevention of fraud and misconduct in the course of scientific production. Usually, the scientific integrity is questioned during the manuscript reviewing process which may result in identification of flaws. Models of scientific publications: In the historical model, readers pay for access to the document. Authors are not remunerated and renounce copyright on their articles to the publisher. The limits of the historical model became clear in the 90s, facing the cost of publishing, reduction in the number of subscribers, development of the Internet and willingness to improve manuscript evaluation.With the development of the Internet and the paradigm of open access, publishers proposed a new model in the 2000s, replacing the cost of access to articles for the reader with the payment of Article Processing Charges (APCs) paid by the author or its institution ("author pays" model). In this model, the content of the article can be freely reproduced and used, provided that the original author is credited. In addition to the evaluation of the manuscript which remains a critical factor, the cost of publication appears inequitable. However, all or part of the APCs may be waived, particularly for authors from low- and middle-income countries.For the past 15 years or so, publishers, learned societies and academic or research institutions (including libraries) have been seeking to publish reliable, open access manuscripts that respect scientific integrity while being affordable for the author.Predatory journals emerged in the late 2000s, taking advantage of the success of the authorpays model to capture APCs. Lacking a proper evaluation process resulting in poor-quality publications, these journals are rejected by most scientific institutions. On the other hand, they are particularly attractive in low- and middle-income countries because of their aggressive commercial practices (insistent invitation to submit a manuscript, low rejection rate, rapid publication, reduced APC, etc.).The purpose of each journal is to secure its economic model. This goes through ensuring its visibility, which is determined by the number of citations (online and social media citations) rather than the quality of the articles published. Peer review: This very old concept has not been widely used until the 20th century. In the historical model, manuscript evaluation is generally carried out by members of the learned society that publishes the journal. Evaluation can be either unblinded, single-blinded (referee is anonymous) or double-blinded (author and referee are anonymous). Several studies have shown that blind procedures do not alter the quality of the evaluation. Since the early 90s, post-publication evaluation has emerged, of which there are several variants. The aim is to shorten times to publication and open up the evaluation process more widely in order to limit the bias. Apart from the fact that this system does not guarantee a better evaluation of the manuscript, its main disadvantage is that the article is accessible without validation of the data collection and analysis throughout the entire process, which can be lengthy. Cost and funding of scientific journals: The cost of an article depends on charges that vary according to the conditions and places of production. Reviewers are volunteers. On the other hand, manuscript management, editing and distribution are carried out by professionals, which entail financial charges. Some of these costs are lower in low- and medium-resource countries, where economies of scale and higher benefits are possible. Conclusion: The limits of the historical model have led to the development of several business models of scientific journals, that are in constant evolution, especially the author pays model which promises open access to publications but impacts scientific production. However, the evaluation of scientific production is heterogeneous due to a limited pool of reviewers inadequately selected. Scientific publishing is looking for solutions to find a virtuous model that respects open science, open access to data and scientific integrity. The "Diamond open access" model, free of charge for both readers and authors with the guarantee of an irrevocable license to reproduce the content of the article provided that the original source is cited, perfectly fits.

COVID-19 pandemic as reflected in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine.

The editorial demonstrates changes in the number and subject matter of papers dealing with issues related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which were published in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine (ACEM) during 3 years of the pandemic (2020-2022). In 2020, 24 such manuscripts were submitted to the editorial office, of which 9 were published; in 2021, 48 were submitted and 10 published, while in 2022, there were 34 articles submitted and 4 published. Authors of this editorial point out that while initially chances for publication of papers regarding COVID-19 were greater than papers covering other issues, the editors of ACEM gradually enforced the same requirements for COVID-19-related papers as for the others (the acceptance rate for these papers was 37.5% in 2020, 20.8% in 2021 and 11.8% in 2022). The published papers described, among other aspects, the relationship between COVID-19 and other diseases (e.g., pneumonia, Parkinson's disease and acute kidney injury) and methods of preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare staff. An emergency situation of pandemic called for disseminating the results of scientific research as promptly as possible; however, the proper answer to this challenge is not lowering and simplifying requirements for peer review, but releasing the results in a form of registered preprints, which allow for provisionally making the paper available for the scientific community while the peer review verification is still ongoing.

Checklists for reporting research in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine: How to choose a proper one for your manuscript?

Various guidelines for authors of research papers and the checklists that often accompany these statements play an important role in the creation of carefully written scientific papers - for authors, they serve as tools to ensure the correct structure and content of the manuscript, increasing the chances that a paper will be published in a journal with a high rejection rate. The aim of this editorial is to provide a concise outline of the checklists most frequently used to guide the structuring of papers published in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, and to support current and prospective authors of this journal in choosing a checklist for their manuscript.The EQUATOR website is presented as a useful tool in choosing a checklist: https://www.equator-network.org/. Then, 8 checklists that are most popular among authors who publish their work in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine are outlined: STROBE - for observational studies; ARRIVE - for any area of bioscience research using laboratory animals; CASP - for qualitative studies; CONSORT - for parallel group randomized trials; PRISMA - for all reviews and meta-analyses; SQUIRE - for studies on quality improvement in healthcare; STARD - for diagnostic accuracy studies; REMARK - for tumor marker prognostic studies. Each of the 8 presented checklists is discussed in a following order: 1) the name of the checklist is explained; 2) the type of articles to which it is intended is pointed out; 3) the structure of the checklist is explained; 4) if there are any extensions of the presented checklist for specific subtypes of papers, they are listed; 5) the most important literature on the presented checklist is provided.As a take-home message, basic tips for choosing a checklist are formulated. Finally, examples of papers adhering to each discussed checklist are provided.

Evolution of World Journal of Clinical Cases over the past 5 years.

Analysis of the articles published in any journal is necessary to ascertain the performance of the journal in the academia. The author made a scientometric analysis of the articles published in the World Journal of Clinical Cases in the past 5 years and present the data to the readers.

Luisa Francisca Acosta Ortega. Liderazgo con nombre de mujer / Luisa Francisca Acosta Ortega. Lidership with a woman´s name

En este artículo se resaltan las cualidades humanas y otros aspectos de la vida de quien fuera Vicedecana Académica de la Facultad de Estomatología y posteriormente Directora del Centro Provincial de Información de Ciencias Médicas de Santiago de Cuba, en el período de abril del 2014 hasta abril del 2022. Se destacan los logros alcanzados a lo largo de su quehacer, desde que inició en la Universidad Médica hasta nuestros días, así como su valioso aporte a la docencia y a la formación de diversos grupos de educandos, además, se realzan los avances alcanzados en la revista MEDISAN en su etapa de Directora del Centro de Información hasta el día de su feliz jubilación.

The human qualities and some other aspects of the life of the Academic Vice-dean of the Estomatological Faculty and then the Head of the Provincial Information Center of Medical Sciences from Santiago de Cuba are highlighted in this work, in the period from April, 2014 to the same month in 2022.The achievements reached during her working life, since she began in the Medical University up to the present, as well as her valuable dedication to the teaching and training of different groups of students are presented, besides compiling achievements in journal MEDISAN during her leadership as Director of the Provincial Information Center up to the day of her happy retirement.

Algunas recomendaciones para publicar un artículo científico en una revista de impacto / Some recommendations to publish a scientific article in an impact journal

RESUMEN El artículo científico se define como un informe escrito y publicado que describe resultados originales de una investigación. Al redactar cualquier texto científico es necesario tener en cuenta que es un reflejo de la actividad cognoscitiva del hombre. La forma más reconocida y considerada por muchos, así como la de mayor apoyo social, es la publicación en revistas académicas de alto prestigio. Para ello tiene que existir un constante perfeccionamiento del vocabulario científico y la manera de estructurar el conocimiento que se brinda. Todo experimento debe quedar escrito para que otros investigadores puedan contrastarlo y reproducirlo. De otra forma, los resultados serían imprecisos, efímeros y se terminarían perdiendo. Este artículo de revisión recopila información a partir de la base de datos de Medline/PubMed. Se describen herramientas metodológicas, así como un conjunto de recomendaciones que permitan escribir un artículo científico para que sea admitido en una revista científica de impacto.

ABSTRACT The scientific article is defined as a written and published report that describes original results of an investigation. When writing any scientific text it is necessary to bear in mind that it is a reflection of the cognitive activity of man. The most recognized and considered form by many, as well as the one with the greatest social support, is publication in highly prestigious academic journals. For this, there must be a constant improvement of the scientific vocabulary and the way of structuring the knowledge that is provided. Every experiment must be written down so that other researchers can compare it and reproduce it. Otherwise, the results would be imprecise, short-lived and would be lost. This review article collects information from the Medline / PubMed database. Methodological tools are described, as well as a set of recommendations that allow writing a scientific article to be admitted in a scientific journal of impact.

[An exceptionally long line: 50 years of "Polymers in Medicine"].

The history of "Polymers in Medicine" reflects not only the development of utilizing such materials in medicine and pharmaceutics, but also changes in Polish scientific journals - dissemination of results of scientific research and broader scientific activity always takes place in a specific linguistic and sociopolitical context. The paper presents a brief historical sketch of the journal, starting from the establishment of the information bulletin "Plastics in Medicine", through the 1st International Conference of the COMECON "Utilization of plastics in medicine", which took place in Warsaw in October 1969, and the founding of "Polymers in Medicine" in 1970-1971, until the present day. Subsequent editors-in-chief are introduced, along with transformations of the layout, and above all, the evolution of issues described in the published papers, which initially concerned chiefly polymer materials in general, orthotics and plastic medical equipment. The changing rhythm of publication of the journal is discussed on the background of economic transformations during the decline of Polish People's Republic and the early days of modern Poland. Languages in which articles and additional materials were published in "Polymers in Medicine" can be regarded as a symbol of changes in the globalizing world of science: between 1964 and 1986 four languages (Polish, English, Russian, and German), then three (without German) until 1997, then two (Russian also disappeared) and - since 2021 - one (English).

Women made visible: a different perspective on the history of the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Portugal, 1943-1966 / Mulheres visíveis: uma perspectiva diferente na história do Instituto de Medicina Tropical em Portugal, 1943-1966

Abstract This work focuses on the scientific research conducted by women at Portugal's Institute of Tropical Medicine between 1943 and 1966. The Institute's scientific journal documents the participation of women in tropical medicine during this period. Their publications addressed a variety of subjects and resulted from research carried out in the metropolis as well as Portugal's overseas colonies. Most of the articles written by these women were are co-authored by their male colleagues, reflecting the incorporation of female researchers into scientific networks already established by men. This work in progress provides a starting point to lend visibility to a group of scientific actors who are practically absent from the historiography of tropical medicine.

Resumo O foco deste trabalho é a pesquisa científica realizada por mulheres no Instituto de Medicina Tropical, em Portugal, entre 1943 e 1966. O periódico científico do Instituto documenta a participação das mulheres na medicina tropical nesse período. Suas publicações abordavam uma diversidade de temas e resultaram de pesquisas realizadas na metrópole, bem como nas colônias ultramarinas de Portugal. A maioria dos artigos escritos por mulheres contava com a coautoria de seus colegas homens, refletindo a incorporação de pesquisadoras às redes científicas já estabelecidas por homens. Este trabalho em andamento representa um ponto de partida para dar visibilidade a um grupo de atores científicos que está praticamente ausente da historiografia da medicina tropical.

Quality of peer review reports submitted to a specialty psychiatry journal.

BACKGROUND: Though peer review is at the heart of scholarly publishing, peer review reports are not commonly investigated. We aimed to analyse the quality and structure of review reports submitted to the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine (IJPM). METHODS: We systematically analysed the structure, tone, and quality of peer review reports of all original articles submitted to the journal between January 1, 2018 to May 15, 2020. Quality assessment was done using the 8-item Review Quality Instrument (RQI). RESULTS: A total of 527 review reports from 291 original articles were analysed. More than two-thirds of review reports were provided as inline comments (n = 368, 69.8 %). Most of the review reports were not well-structured; only a few provided a summary (n = 64, 13.2 %) or divided the comments into major and minor ones (n = 12, 2.5 %). Nearly a quarter had negative wordings (n = 117, 24.1 %) and a minority had a frankly unprofessional tone (n = 43, 8.8 %). The global rating was "poor" (n = 266, 50.5 %) or "below average" (n = 203, 38.5 %) for most reports. CONCLUSION: Most of the peer reviews submitted to the IJPM were not structured and obtained low scores on the RQI domains. Concerted efforts are needed to improve the quality of peer reviews and to provide training for reviewers.

Media convergence of comprehensive preventive medical journals / 上海预防医学

Media convergence is the combination and convergence of every element of media in forms of breakdown of traditional classification, formats and distribution etc. It means the blending of its contents, consumers and operations in full and a new media was developed named as new media. The paper tries to explore the media convergence by starting from the paper-printed media, especially from the scientific journals. It is obvious that the basement is the electronization of media, comprehensive use of multi-technology is the fundamental tools, and it made the results of the inevitability of deep changes in term of thoughts, mindset and managerial principles as well. At the same time, the adverse effect of media convergence consequently coming from the freedom and openness of media convergence will be considered and avoided, so the surveillance of administrative functions and technicals should be adopted or developed accordingly.

Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature.

BACKGROUND: Preprint usage is growing rapidly in the life sciences; however, questions remain on the relative quality of preprints when compared to published articles. An objective dimension of quality that is readily measurable is completeness of reporting, as transparency can improve the reader's ability to independently interpret data and reproduce findings. METHODS: In this observational study, we initially compared independent samples of articles published in bioRxiv and in PubMed-indexed journals in 2016 using a quality of reporting questionnaire. After that, we performed paired comparisons between preprints from bioRxiv to their own peer-reviewed versions in journals. RESULTS: Peer-reviewed articles had, on average, higher quality of reporting than preprints, although the difference was small, with absolute differences of 5.0% [95% CI 1.4, 8.6] and 4.7% [95% CI 2.4, 7.0] of reported items in the independent samples and paired sample comparison, respectively. There were larger differences favoring peer-reviewed articles in subjective ratings of how clearly titles and abstracts presented the main findings and how easy it was to locate relevant reporting information. Changes in reporting from preprints to peer-reviewed versions did not correlate with the impact factor of the publication venue or with the time lag from bioRxiv to journal publication. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that, on average, publication in a peer-reviewed journal is associated with improvement in quality of reporting. They also show that quality of reporting in preprints in the life sciences is within a similar range as that of peer-reviewed articles, albeit slightly lower on average, supporting the idea that preprints should be considered valid scientific contributions.