EN

Gaming the peer review system: Evidence for a review mill in medicine highlights the need to ensure reviewer integrity

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : M. Ángeles Oviedo-García, René Aquarius, Dorothy V. M. Bishop

Background

Review mills are recognized when individuals generate numerous generic review reports, typically containing suggestions for citations to their own work. Here, we report a network with characteristics of a review mill in the field of gynecological oncology.

Methods

Our search started with a review that contained “boilerplate” comments as well as suggestions that specific PubMed IDs be cited. We searched the internet using Google for review reports using the same boilerplate comments. We coded text to quantify similarities between reviews and compiled citations suggested by reviewers. For comparison, we analyzed 59 reviews of the same articles by other peer reviewers.

Results

We identified a network of 195 review reports that shared boilerplate text from 170 articles. One hundred and eighty-six reports suggested citing articles coauthored by a member of the network. Five members of the network had editorial roles. Authors of 142 articles complied with suggestions for citation. Boilerplate text and citation recommendations were rare in the comparison reports.

Conclusions

Review mills lead to articles being published without proper peer review. This is of particular concern in medical research. Open peer review and transparent reporting of the editors responsible for handling papers will make it easier to detect review mills.

URL : Gaming the peer review system: Evidence for a review mill in medicine highlights the need to ensure reviewer integrity

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2640012

EN

The evolution of Baltic scientific journals

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Gergely Ferenc Lendvai, Péter Sasvári, Arūnas Gudinavičius

This study examines the evolution of scientific journals in the Baltic states, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, through a scientometric lens, assessing their international integration, publication trends, and impact within the global research ecosystem.

Using Scopus and SciVal databases, we analysed 49,695 articles from 122 Baltic journals indexed in Scopus, focusing on quartile rankings, subject area distributions, citation impact, and international collaborations.

The findings reveal that while the number of Baltic journals has increased significantly since 1990, these journals remain largely positioned in the lower quartiles (Q3 and Q4), with few achieving Q1 status. Social sciences and humanities dominate the Baltic publishing landscape, yet these disciplines exhibit relatively low citation metrics compared to STEM fields. International collaboration remains limited, with single-country publications (SCPs) prevailing, though a notable rise in co-authorship with Chinese scholars in Lithuanian journals has emerged.

Despite digitalization efforts, there are still systemic problems. Peer review challenges persist due to small academic communities and language barriers. Furthermore, Baltic journals are not visible internationally. Citation impact remains modest, with older articles experiencing diminishing citation rates over time.

Our study highlights the need for enhanced journal management practices, greater international collaboration, and increased indexing efforts to improve the global visibility and prestige of Baltic journals.

URL : The evolution of Baltic scientific journals

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05580-7

EN

Peer Community In and Peer Community Journal: A Two-Step Diamond OA Process Giving Research Communities Back Control of Publishing

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Barbara Class , Denis Bourguet, Thomas Guillemaud

The current academic publishing system faces many well-identified issues. Not only is it slow and costly, but it is also an opaque system that produces a substantial amount of non-reproducible results.

Peer Community In (PCI) is a non-profit organisation that allows research communities to organise the open and free peer-review of preprints on different thematic platforms. The authors of preprints that are recommended by these platforms can then choose to submit them to any journal or to Peer Community Journal, a diamond open access journal, which publishes any and only PCI-recommended preprints.

Because PCI follows the highest standards for evaluations and openness, many institutions and journals publicly recognise PCI-recommended preprints as being of similar value to accepted journal articles.

This two-step process hence decouples the evaluation of research articles from their publication, while offering a free open-access publication venue for its recommended preprints. Doing so allows researchers to reappropriate the publishing system, and the increasing number of submissions, publications, and communities shows a growing demand for such alternative publishing models.

Ongoing developments aim to further increase the robustness and reproducibility of published research via increasing requirements and checks at submission and promoting the use of registered reports.

URL : Peer Community In and Peer Community Journal: A Two-Step Diamond OA Process Giving Research Communities Back Control of Publishing

HAL :  https://hal.science/hal-05536120

EN

PreprintToPaper dataset: connecting bioRxiv preprints with journal publications

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Autors : Fidan Badalova, Julian Sienkiewicz, Philipp Mayr

The PreprintToPaper dataset connects bioRxiv preprints with their corresponding journal publications, enabling large-scale analysis of the preprint-to-publication process. It comprises metadata for 145,517 preprints from two periods, 2016–2018 (pre-pandemic) and 2020–2022 (pandemic), retrieved via the bioRxiv and Crossref APIs.

We selected the two periods to capture preprint-publication dynamics before and during the COVID-19 pandemic while avoiding transitional years. Each record includes bibliographic information such as titles, abstracts, authors, institutions, submission dates, licenses, and subject categories, alongside enriched publication metadata including journal names, publication dates, author lists, and further information.

In addition to the main dataset, a version-history subset provides all available versions of preprints within the two selected periods, enabling analysis of how preprints evolve over time. Preprints are categorized into three groups: Published (formally linked to a journal article), Preprint Only (posted on a preprint server), and Gray Zone (potentially published in a journal but unlinked).

To enhance reliability, title and author similarity scores were computed, and a human-annotated subset of 299 records was created to evaluate Gray Zone cases. The dataset supports diverse applications, including studies of scholarly communication, open science policies, bibliometric tool development, and natural language processing research on textual changes between preprints and their corresponding journal articles.

URL : PreprintToPaper dataset: connecting bioRxiv preprints with journal publications

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-026-06867-3

EN

Perceptions and values of Spanish women scientists towards digital science communication

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Rosana Villares, Carmen Pérez-Llantada, Oana Maria Carciu

The digitalisation of science communication has been widely promoted within the Open Science movement in Europe to foster the social impact of research, as well as a more participatory culture of science.

Using semi-structured interviews, we explore Spanish women scientists’ values and perceptions regarding digital science communication. Results highlight the social value of science communication as well as intrinsic motivation as factors to actively engage in disseminating, educating and promoting science digitally.

Adopting Open Science principles, participants craft open access multimodal materials (e.g., educational short videos, podcasts), use supporting multimodal resources and digital tools, and engage in social media to reach broad audiences.

Finally, we propose some policy recommendations and pedagogical guidelines in terms of digital literacy, digital genres, and science accommodation strategies to promote digital science communication.

URL : Perceptions and values of Spanish women scientists towards digital science communication

DOI : https://doi.org/10.22323/156420251226063745

EN

Generative artificial intelligence in the publishing industry: adoption, use, intellectual property, and other challenges

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Marco Giraldo-Barreto

Taking as a starting point how generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) works, this text explores the level of adoption of such technology in the publishing sector (in particular for Latin America), shows examples of legislation challenges faced by states and the publishing industry in terms of intellectual property, and the implications of GenAI misuse in the academic publishing context. Finally, it proposes a course of action for a responsible adoption for the publishing chain of value.

URL : Generative artificial intelligence in the publishing industry: adoption, use, intellectual property, and other challenges

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2026.1759242

EN

Can ChatGPT be a good follower of academic paradigms? Research quality evaluations in conflicting areas of sociology

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Mike Thelwall, Ralph Schroeder, Meena Dhanda

Purpose

It has become increasingly likely that Large Language Models (LLMs) will be used to score the quality of academic publications to support research assessment goals in the future. This may cause problems for fields with competing paradigms since there is a risk that one may be favoured, causing long term harm to the reputation of the other.

Design/methodology/approach

To test whether this is plausible, this article uses 17 ChatGPTs to evaluate up to 100 journal articles from each of eight pairs of competing sociology paradigms (1490 altogether). Each article was assessed by prompting ChatGPT to take one of five roles: paradigm follower, opponent, antagonistic follower, antagonistic opponent, or neutral.

Findings

Articles were scored highest by ChatGPT when it followed the aligning paradigm, and lowest when it was told to devalue it and to follow the opposing paradigm. Broadly similar patterns occurred for most of the paradigm pairs. Follower ChatGPTs displayed only a small amount of favouritism compared to neutral ChatGPTs, but articles evaluated by an opposing paradigm ChatGPT had a substantial disadvantage. Research limitations: The data covers a single field and LLM.

Practical implications

The results confirm that LLM instructions for research evaluation should be carefully designed to ensure that they are paradigm-neutral to avoid accidentally resolving conflicts between paradigms on a technicality by devaluing one side’s contributions. Originality/value: This is the first demonstration that LLMs can be prompted to show a partiality for academic paradigms.

URL : https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22426