Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links

Authors : Guillaume Cabanac, Theodora Oikonomidi, Isabelle Boutron

Preprints promote the open and fast communication of non-peer reviewed work. Once a preprint is published in a peer-reviewed venue, the preprint server updates its web page: a prominent hyperlink leading to the newly published work is added.

Linking preprints to publications is of utmost importance as it provides readers with the latest version of a now certified work. Yet leading preprint servers fail to identify all existing preprint–publication links.

This limitation calls for a more thorough approach to this critical information retrieval task: overlooking published evidence translates into partial and even inaccurate systematic reviews on health-related issues, for instance.

We designed an algorithm leveraging the Crossref public and free source of bibliographic metadata to comb the literature for preprint–publication links. We tested it on a reference preprint set identified and curated for a living systematic review on interventions for preventing and treating COVID-19 performed by international collaboration: the COVID-NMA initiative (covid-nma.com).

The reference set comprised 343 preprints, 121 of which appeared as a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. While the preprint servers identified 39.7% of the preprint–publication links, our linker identified 90.9% of the expected links with no clues taken from the preprint servers.

The accuracy of the proposed linker is 91.5% on this reference set, with 90.9% sensitivity and 91.9% specificity. This is a 16.26% increase in accuracy compared to that of preprint servers. We release this software as supplementary material to foster its integration into preprint servers’ workflows and enhance a daily preprint–publication chase that is useful to all readers, including systematic reviewers.

This preprint–publication linker currently provides day-to-day updates to the biomedical experts of the COVID-NMA initiative.

URL : Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03900-7

Crédibilité du chercheur, relation de confiance et éthique en recherche qualitative : l’implexité à la croisée des chemins

Auteur/Author : Bakary Doucouré

Cet article, élaboré à partir d’observations et d’expériences accumulées durant une quinzaine d’années dans le cadre de plusieurs recherches empiriques, analyse l’intérêt de la crédibilité du chercheur et de la relation de confiance dans un processus de recherche qualitative.

Il relève d’une démarche autoréflexive et introspective faisant émerger la place de l’implexité et le rôle essentiel de l’éthique dans le processus d’enquête qualitative, tout en permettant de mieux comprendre le lien entre les deux.

Aussi cet article s’inscrit de manière plus large dans les réflexions épistémologiques, méthodologiques et éthiques portant sur la recherche qualitative qui constituent des préoccupations à la fois constantes, évolutives et sans cesse renouvelées. Il est structuré autour de deux principaux axes.

D’une part, il aborde un ensemble de questions portant à la fois sur la crédibilité, la confiance, l’éthique et l’implexité, tout en indiquant des perspectives analytiques qui s’en dégagent.

D’autre part, à partir de l’analyse des données, l’article montre la relation entre l’implexité, la crédibilité et la confiance, mais aussi la dynamique de renforcement mutuel entre l’éthique et l’implexité.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/1076346ar

La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des institutions d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche

Auteurs/Authors : Julie Hermesse, Audrey Vankeerberghen

Ce texte présente les principales questions et réflexions qui ont traversé la journée d’étude « La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des universités » organisée le 14 septembre 2018 à l’Université libre de Bruxelles.

La transdisciplinarité contribue aux transformations sociétales par la production d’un savoir hybride, à la fois scientifique et socialement pertinent. Si cela correspond aux missions de recherche et de service à la société prônées par les institutions académiques, force est de constater que la recherche transdisciplinaire ne s’y installe pas sans tension et ne bénéficie pas encore d’une légitimité reconnue.

Partant de ce constat, cette journée fut l’occasion de mettre en dialogue différents acteurs concernés par la transdisciplinarité afin de réfléchir aux enjeux propres à la mise en œuvre de ce mode de recherche dans les institutions académiques : financement, légitimité des connaissances produites ou encore modes de validation des carrières scientifiques.

Ces réflexions ont généré des débats, pointé des obstacles mais également actionné des leviers pour permettre la transition nécessaire au déploiement de la transdisciplinarité.

URL : La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des institutions d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2021006

Publication by association: how the COVID-19 pandemic has shown relationships between authors and editorial board members in the field of infectious diseases

Authors : Clara Locher, David Moher, Ioana Alina Cristea, Florian Naudet

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the rush to scientific and political judgements on the merits of hydroxychloroquine was fuelled by dubious papers which may have been published because the authors were not independent from the practices of the journals in which they appeared.

This example leads us to consider a new type of illegitimate publishing entity, ‘self-promotion journals’ which could be deployed to serve the instrumentalisation of productivity-based metrics, with a ripple effect on decisions about promotion, tenure and grant funding, but also on the quality of manuscripts that are disseminated to the medical community and form the foundation of evidence-based medicine.

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111670

Semantic micro-contributions with decentralized nanopublication services

Authors : Tobias Kuhn, Ruben Taelman, Vincent Emonet, Haris Antonatos, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Michel Dumontier

While the publication of Linked Data has become increasingly common, the process tends to be a relatively complicated and heavy-weight one. Linked Data is typically published by centralized entities in the form of larger dataset releases, which has the downside that there is a central bottleneck in the form of the organization or individual responsible for the releases.

Moreover, certain kinds of data entries, in particular those with subjective or original content, currently do not fit into any existing dataset and are therefore more difficult to publish.

To address these problems, we present here an approach to use nanopublications and a decentralized network of services to allow users to directly publish small Linked Data statements through a simple and user-friendly interface, called Nanobench, powered by semantic templates that are themselves published as nanopublications.

The published nanopublications are cryptographically verifiable and can be queried through a redundant and decentralized network of services, based on the grlc API generator and a new quad extension of Triple Pattern Fragments.

We show here that these two kinds of services are complementary and together allow us to query nanopublications in a reliable and efficient manner. We also show that Nanobench makes it indeed very easy for users to publish Linked Data statements, even for those who have no prior experience in Linked Data publishing.

URL : Semantic micro-contributions with decentralized nanopublication services

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.387

Open access journal publishing in the business disciplines: A closer look at the low uptake and discipline-specific considerations

Authors : Mikael Laakso, Bo-Christer Björk

The Internet has enabled efficient electronic publishing of scholarly journals and Open Access business models. Recent studies have shown that adoption of Open Access journals has been uneven across scholarly disciplines, where the business and economics disciplines in particular seem to lag behind all other fields of research.

Through bibliometric analysis of journals indexed in Scopus, we find the share of articles in Open Access journals in business, management, and accounting to be only 6%. We further studied the Open Access availability of articles published during 2014–2019 in journals included in the Financial Times 50 journal list (19,969 articles in total).

None of the journals are full Open Access, but 8% of the articles are individually open and for a further 35% earlier manuscript versions are available openly on the web. The results suggest that the low adoption rate of Open Access journals in the business fields is a side-effect of evaluation practices emphasizing publishing in journals included, in particular, ranking lists, creating disincentives for business model innovation, and barriers for new entrants among journals.

Currently, most business school research has to be made Open Access through other ways than through full Open Access journals, and libraries play an important role in facilitating this in a sustainable way.

URL : Open access journal publishing in the business disciplines: A closer look at the low uptake and discipline-specific considerations

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211006769

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

Authors : Esteban Morales, Erin McKiernan, Meredith T. Niles, Lesley Schimanski, Juan Pablo Alperin

Despite the calls for change, there is significant consensus that when it comes to evaluating publications, review, promotion, and tenure processes should aim to reward research that is of high “quality,” has an “impact,” and is published in “prestigious” journals.

Nevertheless, such terms are highly subjective and present challenges to ascertain precisely what such research looks like. Accordingly, this article responds to the question: how do faculty from universities in the United States and Canada define the terms quality, prestige, and impact?

We address this question by surveying 338 faculty members from 55 different institutions. This study’s findings highlight that, despite their highly varied definitions, faculty often describe these terms in overlapping ways. Additionally, results shown that marked variance in definitions across faculty does not correspond to demographic characteristics.

This study’s results highlight the need to more clearly implement evaluation regimes that do not rely on ill-defined concepts.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.14.439880