Étiquette : scientific communication

Catégories
EN

Building internationally competitive journals for science data sharing: The evolution of three biomedical English academic journals launched in China

Authors : Huisheng Wang, Hao Cheng

Academic journals serve as the platform of scientific collaboration. As China’s contribution to world-class science is advancing at a remarkable pace, cultivating world-class English-language journals has become a national imperative issue. Taking Academician George F. Gao and the three flagship journals he founded or led—Protein & Cell (2010), China CDC Weekly (2019), and hLife (2023)—as examples, herein we trace the evolutionary trajectory of English-language periodicals in China, dissecting their evolving missions, internationalization strategies and contributions to biosafety and ethical governance to provide a reproducible roadmap for currently-emerging journals.

Through analyses of the case of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) gene-editing ethics controversy, pandemic-data-sharing protocols, and international cooperation frameworks, we highlight that journals are pivotal arenas where domestic and global scientific discourses on critical biosafety and public health issues are made.

Building internationally competitive journals for science data sharing scientific governance will serve as a critical foundation for China’s ambitions to become a scientific power and for its deeper engagement in global science and technology governance.

URL : Building internationally competitive journals for science data sharing: The evolution of three biomedical English academic journals launched in China

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsheal.2026.04.002

Catégories
EN

Research integrity and open access models: insights from Retraction Watch and OpenAlex

Author : Ben Rawlins

This study examines the relationship between research integrity and open access (OA) publishing models using data from Retraction Watch and OpenAlex. Analysing 60,608 retracted publications from 2009 to 2024, the article traces how retraction patterns have shifted alongside the expansion of OA, with gold OA surpassing closed access as the dominant modality among retracted articles by 2023.

The analysis also highlights the economic dimensions of research integrity and OA, with an estimated US$41.9 million in article processing charges (APCs) collected by publishers for research that was later retracted.

These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control. Rather than framing OA as inherently more or less prone to integrity failures, the article argues that these challenges reflect broader incentive structures within contemporary scholarly publishing.

Addressing them will require co‑ordinated governance efforts among publishers, funders, libraries and research institutions to ensure that OA is matched by accountability, transparency and trust in scholarly research.

URL : Research integrity and open access models: insights from Retraction Watch and OpenAlex

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.763

Catégories
EN

The Rise of Diamond Open Access Journals in Earth Sciences: Past Developments, Present Tensions, and Future Pathways

Authors : Olivier Pourret, Maëlis Arnould, Thibault Duretz, James Ian Farquharson, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Larry Syu-Heng Lai, Alice Lefebvre, Craig Magee, Marc-Alban Millet, Samantha Teplitzky, Camille Thomas, Romain Vaucher, Lauren Waszek, Mark A Wieczorek, Thomas William Wong Hearing

Over roughly the last decade, a visible, community-led Diamond Open Access (OA) ecosystem has emerged in the Earth sciences, not as a departure from tradition, but as the latest expression of a long-standing culture of open, society-supported scholarly communication.

While free-to-read, fee-free publishing initiatives have deep roots in the field, predating the Diamond terminology by decades and encompassing regional infrastructures and institutional serial publishing by geological surveys and learned societies, the period since the mid-2010s has brought a new wave of explicitly Diamond-identified, community-governed disciplinary journals that have transformed the visibility and ambition of this model. This article analyzes that transition through a field-specific lens, taking journals such as Volcanica, Seismica, Tektonika, Geomorphica, Geodynamica, Sedimentologika, Advances in Geochemistry and Cosmochemistry, Open Paleontology, Planetary Research, and Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior as emblematic of a broader shift in scholarly communication.

Building on current Diamond OA debates, we argue that Earth sciences Diamond journals are not merely “no-fee” outlets but sociotechnical experiments in reclaiming agency, redistributing publishing labor, and redefining value away from commercial metrics. This article develops three claims. First, the Earth sciences Diamond turn has been enabled by existing community infrastructures and high levels of volunteer coordination, but it remains uneven and fragile.

Second, Diamond models strengthen equity for authors and readers while exposing unresolved tensions around labor sustainability, institutional support, and recognition regimes still structured by prestige metrics. Third, Earth sciences offer a strategically important testbed for a wider transition towards commons-based scholarly communication, especially where global fieldwork, data justice, and decolonizing commitments demand alternatives to the pay-to-read and pay-to-publish systems.

We conclude that the next decade should prioritize durable funding compacts, shared technical infrastructure, and reform of research assessment so that Diamond OA can scale without reproducing extractive or technocratic governance.

URL : The Rise of Diamond Open Access Journals in Earth Sciences: Past Developments, Present Tensions, and Future Pathways

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31223/X56J5P

Catégories
EN

Modernizing Legal Scholarship: Toward Open Access Compliance

Authors : Ana Rogers-Butterworth, Melissa Moreau

Introduction and Literature Review: Legal research often operates outside conventional academic scholarship standards, characterized by a proliferation of student-edited journals and a notable absence of rigorous peer review. While some law journals have sought to align with established academic standards, many have struggled to keep pace with emerging open access (OA) requirements, such as those outlined by Plan S. As funding agencies increasingly mandate immediate OA for research outputs, the field of legal scholarly communications faces urgent needs for adaptation and modernization.

Methods: This study analyzed the OA policies of 384 journals that included articles and reviews authored by Canadian law faculty members. Data were extracted from Web of Science and Open Alex, focusing on six law faculties across Canada known for their high research output. Quantitative methods were used to assess publishing policies concerning OA principles.

Results: The findings reveal a strong preference for hybrid OA journals, particularly those with an international focus, often produced by interdisciplinary publishers. Diamond OA journals, primarily centered in North America, ranked second. Notably, a significant number of diamond OA journals fail to meet established OA standards, alongside a considerable presence of closed-access law journals.

Discussion and Conclusion: A consistent theme among law-specific publications, whether from academic faculty or corporate law publishers, is a pervasive lack of compliance with OA standards and a limited understanding of their implications. This underscores the imperative for further education and policy reform within the legal publishing ecosystem to enhance access and uphold the principles of open scholarship.

URL : Modernizing Legal Scholarship: Toward Open Access Compliance

DOI : https://doi.org/%2010.31274/jlsc.20259

Catégories
EN

The Role of Preprints in Neuroscience Scholarly Communication: A Citation Analysis

Authors : Behrooz Rasuli, Fatemeh Seyfzadeh, Aurore Thibaut, Olivia Gosseries

Preprints, scientific manuscripts publicly shared prior to peer-review, are now part of scholarly 25 communication as emerging information resources. While neuroscience researchers have increasingly 26 published preprints, the impact of preprints in this field remains unclear.

Through a bibliometric 27 approach, this case study explored preprint citation patterns. Results yielded over 33,000 citations to 28 preprints within Scopus-indexed neuroscience documents (1993-2022). Trends of citations and 29 citation motivations were investigated. Findings indicated that 1.62% of neuroscience publications 30 cited at least one preprint, with citations peaking at 6% in 2021.

Review and journal articles cited 31 preprints more frequently, compared to books, notes, and conference papers (X² = 1909.015, p < 32 0.001). The most commonly cited servers were bioRxiv, arXiv, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv. Regarding 33 journals, a moderate positive correlation (rs = 0.353, p < 0.01) was found between publications citing 34 preprints and journals’ CiteScores.

Using Scite.ai, 93% of citations were classified as ‘mentioning,’ 35 with considerably fewer being supporting or contrasting. Most preprint citations appeared in 36 Introduction and Discussion, highlighting their role in framing research questions and contextualizing 37 results.

The global overview of these results may help contextualize citation behavior in relation to 38 structural and cultural factors, such as disciplinary norms, policy frameworks, researchers’ attitudes, 39 and health emergencies.

URL : The Role of Preprints in Neuroscience Scholarly Communication: A Citation Analysis

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1162/QSS.a.490

Catégories
EN

Effectiveness of the researcher-led “Peerspectives” peer review training course on review quality, knowledge, and skills among doctoral students in the biomedical sciences: a pre-post study

Authors : Jessica L. Rohmann, Nadja Wülk, Kerstin Rubarth, Hannah Grillmaier, Iman Abdikarim, Mariana Lopes Simões, Sara Schroter, Marco Piccininni, Tobias Kurth, Toivo Glatz

Background

Peer review remains a cornerstone of scientific knowledge dissemination, yet comprehensive, practically relevant training is limited. This inspired us to develop Peerspectives, a peer review training course for doctoral students in the biomedical sciences in Berlin, Germany. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Peerspectives course on editor-judged quality of peer review reports.

Methods

Doctoral students in health research fields who enrolled in the Peerspectives course between October 2020 and August 2022 were invited to participate in the study, and 80 consented. The ~18 week-long course provided training on the structure, purpose, and conduct of peer review and editorial processes in biomedical journals. It included 12 h of lectures, homework assignments, and 12 h of hands-on, small-group workshops, during which students reviewed original research manuscripts currently under consideration at The BMJ under the guidance of experienced mentors.

The primary outcome was the overall quality of the peer review reports as judged by two independent BMJ editors using the global score of the Review Quality Instrument (RQI) pre- and post-intervention. Additionally, we compared participants’ post-course scores with those of actual BMJ reviewers. We also compared participants’ self-assessed knowledge and skills related to scholarly peer review (1–5 Likert scale) before and after the course.

Results

After course completion, the editor-assessed overall quality of the participants’ peer review reports was higher than before the course (median increase of 0.5 points, p < 0.001; mean increase of 0.36 points, p < 0.001). The RQI scores of participants’ post-course reports were not non-inferior to those of actual BMJ reviewers for the same manuscripts. Self-assessed peer review-related knowledge skills increased across all questionnaire items after course completion. Greatest improvements were seen in understanding reviewer expectations (increase in means from 2.9 to 4.5), confidence in reviewing (2.5 to 3.9), and knowing what to look for while reviewing (2.8 to 4.2).

Conclusions

Providing doctoral students with comprehensive training resulted in an editorially significant increase in review report quality and improved understanding of the role and expectations of peer reviewers in the scholarly publishing processes and confidence in giving constructive feedback.

URL : Effectiveness of the researcher-led “Peerspectives” peer review training course on review quality, knowledge, and skills among doctoral students in the biomedical sciences: a pre-post study

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-026-00220-3

Catégories
EN

Challenges of Open Access Adoption in Low-Resource Settings: Lessons From Tunisia

Author : Ridha Mhamdi

Introduction

Open Access (OA) publishing is a transformative movement that removes subscription barriers to facilitate unrestricted dissemination of scholarly research. This study aims to identify gaps in OA adoption in Tunisia, assess whether Gold OA publications enhance the visibility and impact of research, and determine how OA publishing aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Methods

Using Scopus data, we performed a bibliometric analysis of Tunisian research (2020-2024), including publication trends, citation metrics, SDG alignment, and funding sources of OA publications.

Results

Despite high regional productivity, over 60% of publications by Tunisian researchers remain paywalled, limiting their visibility. Hybrid Gold OA demonstrated the highest citation impact, while the advantage of Gold OA was constrained by publication in lower-prestige journals. Although Medicine, Computer Science, and Engineering were the dominant fields in OA output, only 40% of OA publications were aligned with the SDGs.

International collaboration, notably with Saudi Arabia, was a key driver of OA adoption. However, high article processing charges (APCs) and a heavy reliance on institutional funding present significant financial barriers.

Conclusion

Tunisia’s OA expansion is hindered by financial sustainability challenges and a misalignment with SDG-focused research. To enhance global research visibility and contribution to sustainable development, we recommend strategic policy shifts: redirecting funds from subscriptions to OA models, pursuing transformative agreements, supporting Diamond OA, and incentivizing high-impact, sustainability-focused research.

URL : Challenges of Open Access Adoption in Low-Resource Settings: Lessons From Tunisia

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.21182