Integrity at stake: confronting "publish or perish" in the developing world and emerging economies.

The scientific community faces significant ethical challenges due to the "publish or perish" culture, particularly in developing and emerging economies. This paper explores the widespread unethical practices in scientific publishing, including the sale of authorships, the proliferation of "paper mills," and the misuse of artificial intelligence to produce fraudulent research. These practices undermine the integrity of scientific research, skew publication metrics, and distort academic rankings. This study examines various instances of academic fraud, emphasizing the impact on low-income countries, with specific cases from Latin America. Recommendations include stricter verification of authorship, disciplinary measures for scientific fraud, and policies promoting transparency and accountability in research. Addressing these challenges is crucial for maintaining the integrity and credibility of scientific endeavors globally.

Exploring the Landscape of Social Epidemiological Research: A Scoping Review of AJE Publications.

As social epidemiology is a growing interdisciplinary field with a broad scope, this scoping review investigated its current landscape based on articles published in the American Journal of Epidemiology. Among 1,194 extracted records between 2013 and 2022 submitted under the "social" category, we identified 178 accepted articles that had a social factor as a primary exposure. We categorized social exposures into nine major domains, and health outcomes into eight domains. Study design, population, and authorship were also analyzed. Our findings indicate that social epi studies reflect a range of social exposures, including socioeconomic position (37%), neighborhood and built environment (20%), race, racism, and discrimination (16%), and policy and social welfare (12%). The most frequently studied health outcomes were non-communicable diseases and chronic conditions (42%), mental health (14%), and maternal and child health outcomes (11%). Most studies had quantitative observational designs and focused on high-income countries, particularly the U.S. contexts. Most authors appeared only once, suggesting a range of voices as contributors. Findings suggest that, to enhance knowledge, social epi could benefit from a greater representation of social factors beyond tangible resources, a broader range of health outcomes, study designs and populations, and low- and middle-income countries.

Activity for CUREs to increase student understanding and application of responsible authorship and publication practices.

Professional development of scientists is enhanced by training students in responsible conduct of research earlier in their careers. One aspect of responsible conduct of research is authorship ethics, which concerns granting of credit to those who make intellectual contributions to the research. The activity discussed in this article emphasizes how authorship ethics can be integrated with Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) and includes an adaption that could also be used for independent research students. The activity allows students to reflect upon inequalities and problems seen in scientific authorship, including gender bias, failure to credit effort (ghostwriters), and inclusion of authors that did not meaningfully contribute to the work (honorary/gift authorship). Themes seen in student reflections on how they could demonstrate ethics in authorship included: determining authorship by contribution, appropriate attributions on curriculum vitas (CV) and posters, different credit levels, understanding authorship criteria, and tracking contributions. Themes seen in student reflections on the importance of authorship were proper authorship credit distribution, authorship impacting career opportunities, and accountability in research. In the activity, students also created attributions for a poster to be presented from their research. We found that most students were able to create attributions that were correctly formatted, included the same authors, and positioned authors in the same order as other group members, matching what was presented on the finalized poster. We found that students' reflection on authorship and this professionalization of their activities in their CURE led to modest increases in their view of themselves as scientists.

Unraveling retraction dynamics in COVID-19 research: Patterns, reasons, and implications.

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while the world sought solutions, few scholars exploited the situation for personal gains through deceptive studies and manipulated data. This paper presents the extent of 400 retracted COVID-19 papers listed by the RetractionWatch database until the month of February 2024. The primary purpose of the research was to analyze journal quality and retractions trends. Evaluating the journal's quality is vital for stakeholders, as it enables them to effectively address and prevent such incidents and their future repercussions. The present study found that one-fourth of publications were retracted within the first month of their publication, followed by an additional 6% within six months of publication. One third of the retractions originated from Q1 journals, with another significant portion coming from Q2 (29.8%). An analysis of the reasons for retractions indicates that a quarter of retractions were attributed to multiple causes, predominantly associated with publications in Q2 journals, while another quarter were linked to data issues, primarily observed in Q1 publications. Elsevier retracted 31% of papers, with the majority published as Q1, followed by Springer (11.5%), predominantly as Q2. The study also examined author contributions, revealing that 69.3% were male, with females (30.7%) mainly holding middle author positions.

Path of excellence: A co-authorship network analysis of European Research Council grant winners in social sciences.

The international scientific community puts an ever-growing emphasis on research excellence and performance evaluation. So does the European Union with its flagship research excellence grant scheme organised by the European Research Council. This paper aims to provide an in-depth analysis of one of the ERC's thematic panels within the social sciences, namely the SH2 "Political Science" panel. The analysis is based on empirical, statistical methods, and network analysis tools to gain insights about the grant winners' publication patterns and their coauthor networks. The results draw up an academic career track of the grantees based on quantitative publication patterns and performance. Besides, a change in authorship can be observed, which is proven by the formation of new groups and intensifying intra-group collaboration patterns in the case of all three grant types. However, the ERC grant serves different functions for the winners of three different categories: for the Starting Grant winners, it offers the possibility to kick off and establish their research group, for the Consolidator Grant winners, it opens up new opportunities to extend their co-authorship network, and for the Advanced Grant winners, it offers the chance to start a new collaboration.

Lack of women physician representation in the Japanese Society of Hospital General Medicine.

Background: The increasing number of women physicians is in contrast to their underrepresentation in academic positions and professional associations. This study aimed to evaluate the status of women physicians in the Japanese Society of Hospital General Medicine (JHGM) based on society membership, board membership, and annual meeting authorship. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted. Information on women physicians, society and board membership, and annual meeting authorship was collected. Data from the Japanese Primary Care Association (JPCA) served as the control. The gender of authors with accepted abstracts in the JHGM and JPCA annual meetings was determined by name or Internet search. Results: In the JHGM, 14.2% of members were women physicians, compared to 19.1% in the JPCA (p < 0.001). None of the 21 JHGM board members were women, compared to 20.5% in the JPCA (p < 0.001). The average number of years of experience was significantly higher for the JHGM board members than for the JPCA board members (37.0 vs. 28.1 years, p < 0.001). Women first authors in the 2022-2023 JHGM meeting comprised 17.9%, significantly lower than the 28.4% in the 2023 JPCA meeting (p = 0.002). Similar patterns were seen for women last authors (6.0% in the JHGM vs. 18.8% in the JPCA, p < 0.001) and women chairpersons (17.9% in the JHGM vs. 40.3% in the JPCA, p = 0.036). Conclusions: The JHGM has low women representation in society and board membership, and annual meeting authorship. Strategies are needed to enhance diversity and inclusion by increasing women's participation and leadership in the JHGM.

Scientific misconduct in infectious diseases - European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) survey.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and perception of scientific misconduct in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM), as reported by the ID/CM community. METHODS: An anonymous online ESCMID survey circulated among society members between October 2023 and June 2024; the questionnaire included data on participants' view on their own and their colleagues' scientific misconduct in the last 5 years. RESULTS: The survey received 220 responses. Responders were 73% ID physicians, 52% men, 56% age 35-54 years, and represented 48 countries, mainly European (126 participants). The vast majority of participants (78%) reported they did not personally commit scientific misconduct, while 54% reported witnessing misconduct by colleagues in their field. The most commonly committed misconduct by both responders and their colleagues was misconduct of authorship rules, 14% and 41%, respectively. Overall, 18% reported witnessing misleading reporting and 14% reported witnessing non accurate reporting of conflict of interest. Nevertheless, the majority (>60%) of responders reported high confidence in the integrity of published work in the field of ID/CM. Approximately one third of responders were not aware of the ESCMID ethics advisory committee as an authority to which members can report misconduct. CONCLUSIONS: Scientific misconduct, mostly related to violation of authorship rules, seems to be common in ID/CM. Efforts to improve scientific integrity should be made in order to keep trust in the scientific process.

Study on the Analysis of Gender Trends Among the First Authors of Publications on Budd-Chiari Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) is primarily a disease of hepatic vein blockage, which involves a backflow of blood to the liver. Although there have been many causes linked to this disease, most commonly, it occurs due to hypercoagulable states and blood disorders. In recent times, there has been a fast spread of knowledge regarding early diagnosis and various treatment modalities, which has enabled the prevention of mortality in most cases. This has primarily spread through research articles published in various journals. Thus, the article aims to compare the gender trend ratios to identify the associated discrepancies in terms of male and female author contributions who have been the primary authors for articles pertaining to this disease.  Methodology: A PubMed database between the years 2013 and 2022 was used for the bibliometric analysis. The gender of the primary author was analyzed by NamSor, an application programming interface (API). The statistical analysis was conducted using R software, the ARIMA model, and graphs were prepared using Datawrapper. RESULTS: Out of 667 articles extracted, the analysis showed that there were 455 (68.2%) first male authors and 212 (31.8%) first female authors. We also formulated various other results, which depicted a higher female-to-male author ratio including various journals and different countries. Although there has been an increasing trend of male authors as compared to female authors, this study found that male authorship for research on this disease is still higher. CONCLUSIONS: This study depicts that there is a necessity to draw attention to the inequitable systems favoring men over women for publications. The predictive analysis conducted also helps to foresee the trend in the next few years and explains the necessity of addressing the disparities among both genders in healthcare systems.

Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research over the past 15 years.

Background: In the last 15 years, an increase in U.S. female dermatologists from 41 to 52.2% and a surge in female authorship (FAP) have been noted. Authorship is a pivotal objective measurement of academic productivity and, contribution as first or senior author, plays a major role in the promotion process of active physicians and faculty members. Objective: To validate, analyze, and clarify trends in FAP in high-quality dermatology research in the last 15 years. Methods: The Thomson Reuters Web of Science Journal Citation Reports 2021 was used to retrieve the 100 most-cited original articles from the top 5 dermatology journals (determined by 2021 impact factors) in 5 consecutive 3-year intervals between 2009 and 2023. Gender application programming interface, a gender algorithm, was used to identify FAP according to country of origin and first name. Monotonic trend test significance level was set at 5%. Results: In total, 14,187 articles were retrieved and subdivided into the 100 most-cited in 3-year intervals. A total of 418 first and 447 senior authors' gender were identified. FAP was found in 43%, 31%, and 37% of the first, last, and total authors. Trend analysis revealed a decrease in the last 15 years (S = -4610, P = .068) in senior FAP. Similarly, the trend persists in the United States (S = -1606, P = .052). Limitations: Due to the usage of a binary gender identification algorithm, Nonbinary gender could not be identified in this analysis. Conclusion: The last 15 years show an inverse relationship, with an increase in female dermatologists and a decrease in senior FAP in high-quality journals in the general dermatology community.

Towards equal representation - A bibliometric analysis of authorships in Laboratory Medicine and Clinical Chemistry from the United States, Canada, and Europe (2005-2022).

Objectives: Although diversity has been demonstrated to benefit research groups, women remain underrepresented in most scientific disciplines, including Laboratory Medicine and Clinical Chemistry. In order to promote diversity and equality in scientific communities, understanding the gender distribution of authorship is crucial. Methods: This study included a total of 30,268 Web of Science-listed Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine publications from the United States of America, Canada, and the member countries of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine from 2005 to 2022. In addition to the publication productivity of female and male authors over time, gender-specific publication characteristics and country-specific gender distributions of authorships were examined. Results: Overall, publications with female first authors increased by 49 % between 2005 and 2022, averaging 42 % female first authors. Eastern Europe (60 %) and Southern Europe (51 %) had particularly high proportions of female first authors. While female last authorship was the most predictive of female first authorship, with an odds ratio of 2.01 (95 % CI: 1.91-2.12, p < 0.001), only 27 % of last authors were female. Moreover, citation rate was not predictive of female first or last authorship. Conclusion: Authorship in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine is moving towards gender parity. This trend is more pronounced for first authors than for last authors. Further research into the citations of female authors in this discipline could be a starting point for increasing the visibility of women researchers in science. Moreover, geographical differences may provide opportunities for future research on gender parity across disciplines.

Fostering student authorship skills in synthetic biology.

Women and racial minorities are underrepresented in the synthetic biology community. Developing a scholarly identity by engaging in a scientific community through writing and communication is an important component for STEM retention, particularly for underrepresented individuals. Several excellent pedagogical tools have been developed to teach scientific literacy and to measure competency in reading and interpreting scientific literature. However, fewer tools exist to measure learning gains with respect to writing, or that teach the more abstract processes of peer review and scientific publishing, which are essential for developing scholarly identity and publication currency. Here we describe our approach to teaching scientific writing and publishing to undergraduate students within a synthetic biology course. Using gold standard practices in project-based learning, we created a writing project in which students became experts in a specific application area of synthetic biology with relevance to an important global problem or challenge. To measure learning gains associated with our learning outcomes, we adapted and expanded the Student Attitudes, Abilities, and Beliefs (SAAB) concept inventory to include additional questions about the process of scientific writing, authorship, and peer review. Our results suggest the project-based approach was effective in achieving the learning objectives with respect to writing and peer reviewed publication, and resulted in high student satisfaction and student self-reported learning gains. We propose that these educational practices could contribute directly to the development of scientific identity of undergraduate students as synthetic biologists, and will be useful in creating a more diverse synthetic biology research enterprise.

Developing Confidence in Engaging in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Social Determinants of Health Topics Through Self-Authorship.

OBJECTIVE: This study used a self-authorship framework to explore if diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and social determinants of health (SDoH)-focused laboratories and learning activities increase student confidence in understanding aspects of implicit bias and SDoH, and how these activities impact student comfort in discussing and confidence in initiating conversations on DEI/SDoH topics with colleagues, faculty, supervisors, and patients. METHODS: First-year PharmD students engaged in 3 learning activities across 2 courses. Students were challenged to evaluate their biases and incorporate DEI/SDoH into their professional identity formation. This study used a mixed-methods, embedded approach to analyze assessment data collected via a questionnaire and assignments administered at 3 points during the fall semester. Quantitative analysis used a quasi-experimental, between-participants, pretest-posttest design. The qualitative component used open-ended questions to gain additional insight into participant experiences, gathered detail on perceptions, and provided context. RESULTS: A 1-way analysis of variance showed statistically significant increases between assessment points for all items related to confidence in understanding implicit bias and SDoH. Comfort in discussing DEI/SDoH topics with supervisors/faculty and patients increased over time. Comfort in discussing DEI/SDoH topics with colleagues did not increase. Three salient themes emerged from qualitative analyses: bias and privilege awareness, education, and professionalism. CONCLUSION: This study found that students started evaluating their own knowledge, beliefs, and claims in social and professional settings as defined by the self-authorship framework. Student comfort and confidence in discussing DEI/SDoH topics increased over time. Findings support that engaging students in multimodal programming may support incorporation of DEI/SDoH into professional identity formation.

The increasing authorship trend in neuroscience: A scientometric analysis across 11 countries.

Previous studies have demonstrated an increasing trend of the number of authors across various fields over the years. This trend has been attributed to the necessity for larger collaborations and, at times, to ethical issues regarding authorship attribution. Our study focuses on the evolution of authorship trends in the field of Neuroscience. We conducted our analysis based on a dataset containing 580,782 neuroscience publications produced from 2000 to 2022, focusing on the publications within the Group of ten (G10) countries. Using a matrix-based methodology, we extracted and analyzed the average number of authors per country. Our findings reveal a consistent rise in authorship across all G10 countries over the past two decades. Italy emerged with the highest average number of authors, while France stood out for experiencing the most significant increase, particularly in the last decade. The countries with the lowest number of authors per publication were the USA, UK and Canada. Differences between countries could result from variations in the size of collaboration between researchers in different countries. Additionally, these differences may depend on utilitarian considerations aimed at receiving higher scores in the individual evaluation of their own work. We propose that a normalization procedure for the number of authors should be implemented to ensure a fair evaluation of researchers.

Authorship characteristics of hematology and oncology education chapters: A comprehensive analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving diversity and equity in healthcare, especially within academic and clinical spheres, poses significant challenges. This study aims to evaluate gender representation, geographical diversity among authors, and disclosure of conflicts of interest (COIs) in educational materials published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the American Society of Hematology (ASH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive cross-sectional analysis covering all volumes of ASCO and ASH educational chapters from 2012 to 2022 and 2000 to 2022, respectively. Author data were extracted from the official websites of ASCO and ASH educational books, focusing on names, affiliations, countries of practice, COIs, and publication titles/subjects. RESULTS: Analysis of 2796 articles revealed significant trends in gender representation. Women comprised 44 % of first authors and 38 % of last authors in ASCO educational books, and 39 % of first authors and 39% of last authors in ASH educational books. Notably, there was a marked increase in female first and last authors over time across both ASCO and ASH publications (p < 0.001). Geographical diversity showed disparities, with the majority of authors affiliated with US institutions (72 % of first and last authors). International authors were less represented, with Canada, the UK, and Italy prominent among articles featuring international women authors. A substantial portion of analyzed articles disclosed COIs, mainly research funding, honoraria, and travel expenses. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest a notable rise in female authorship, potentially reflecting efforts by ASH and ASCO to promote diversity. International authorship remained stable, while COIs were prevalent, primarily involving research funding. Addressing the need for greater international engagement and improving COI reporting quality are crucial to promote inclusivity and transparency in academic publications.

Equity and representation in cardiology research: A comprehensive analysis of authorship from low and low-middle income countries in cardiology journals.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality, disproportionately affecting low-income and low-middle-income countries (LICs/LMICs). Despite this, cardiology research commonly comes from affluent regions. This study assessed the authorship trends from LICs/LMICs in cardiology journals listed in PubMed from 2000 to 2022. The World Bank list was used to classify countries. The total number of articles published in the 138 cardiology journals was 529,359. The percentage of articles that included at least one author affiliated with LICs/LMICs institutions was 0.11 % and 2.23 %, respectively. Over the last decade, there has been an increase in the author's representation from LICs/LMICs; however, it is uneven, with some countries experiencing more significant increases (Zambia, Yemen, and Uganda for LICs, and India, Iran, and Lebanon for LMICs). Our findings highlight the inequity of research publication and invite our community to reflect on the need to develop strategies to improve representation from LICs/LMICs.

Human vs machine: identifying ChatGPT-generated abstracts in Gynecology and Urogynecology.

BACKGROUND: ChatGPT, a publicly available artificial intelligence large language model, has allowed for sophisticated artificial intelligence technology on demand. Indeed, use of ChatGPT has already begun to make its way into medical research. However, the medical community has yet to understand the capabilities and ethical considerations of artificial intelligence within this context, and unknowns exist regarding ChatGPT's writing abilities, accuracy, and implications for authorship. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesize that human reviewers and artificial intelligence detection software differ in their ability to correctly identify original published abstracts and artificial intelligence-written abstracts in the subjects of Gynecology and Urogynecology. We also suspect that concrete differences in writing errors, readability, and perceived writing quality exist between original and artificial intelligence-generated text. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-five articles published in high-impact medical journals and a collection of Gynecology and Urogynecology journals were selected. ChatGPT was prompted to write 25 corresponding artificial intelligence-generated abstracts, providing the abstract title, journal-dictated abstract requirements, and select original results. The original and artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were reviewed by blinded Gynecology and Urogynecology faculty and fellows to identify the writing as original or artificial intelligence-generated. All abstracts were analyzed by publicly available artificial intelligence detection software GPTZero, Originality, and Copyleaks, and were assessed for writing errors and quality by artificial intelligence writing assistant Grammarly. RESULTS: A total of 157 reviews of 25 original and 25 artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were conducted by 26 faculty and 4 fellows; 57% of original abstracts and 42.3% of artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were correctly identified, yielding an average accuracy of 49.7% across all abstracts. All 3 artificial intelligence detectors rated the original abstracts as less likely to be artificial intelligence-written than the ChatGPT-generated abstracts (GPTZero, 5.8% vs 73.3%; P<.001; Originality, 10.9% vs 98.1%; P<.001; Copyleaks, 18.6% vs 58.2%; P<.001). The performance of the 3 artificial intelligence detection software differed when analyzing all abstracts (P=.03), original abstracts (P<.001), and artificial intelligence-generated abstracts (P<.001). Grammarly text analysis identified more writing issues and correctness errors in original than in artificial intelligence abstracts, including lower Grammarly score reflective of poorer writing quality (82.3 vs 88.1; P=.006), more total writing issues (19.2 vs 12.8; P<.001), critical issues (5.4 vs 1.3; P<.001), confusing words (0.8 vs 0.1; P=.006), misspelled words (1.7 vs 0.6; P=.02), incorrect determiner use (1.2 vs 0.2; P=.002), and comma misuse (0.3 vs 0.0; P=.005). CONCLUSION: Human reviewers are unable to detect the subtle differences between human and ChatGPT-generated scientific writing because of artificial intelligence's ability to generate tremendously realistic text. Artificial intelligence detection software improves the identification of artificial intelligence-generated writing, but still lacks complete accuracy and requires programmatic improvements to achieve optimal detection. Given that reviewers and editors may be unable to reliably detect artificial intelligence-generated texts, clear guidelines for reporting artificial intelligence use by authors and implementing artificial intelligence detection software in the review process will need to be established as artificial intelligence chatbots gain more widespread use.