Informe: análisis de las publicaciones de socios de la Sociedad Española de Geriatría y Gerontología del año 2006 al 2011

Data is presented from the survey conducted by the Sociedad Española de Geriatría y Gerontología (SEGG) (Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology) among its members in order to assess their scientific production between 2006 and 2011, specifically articles in journals that are indexed in the Science Citation Index. The scientific quality of the publications was quantified using the number of times every article was cited and the journal's impact factor. A total of 162 out of the 2450 members responded (6.6%), reporting a total of 903 individual articles, 335 (37%) of them in geriatrics-specific journals, and 568 (63%) in other journals of other specialties. The number of publications increased yearly from 128 in 2006 to 201 in 2010. The scientific quality could be calculated for 530 articles. On average, publications have been cited 8.2 times (median: 2), with the range of citations being from 0 to 242. The average impact factor was 3.1 (median 2.4), ranging from 0 to 53.5. A number of articles have been published in some of the largest impact factor journals, in those of general-interest, as well as geriatrics-specific and basic science journals.     

基于CiteSpace软件的丛枝菌根真菌近30年研究态势分析

丛枝菌根(arbuscular mycorrhizal,AM)真菌为植物专性共生真菌,可与大多数陆生植物共生,在植物养分吸收、抵御不良环境、维持生态平衡和植物多样性等方面具有重要作用。为了解AM真菌研究发展现状,本文运用CiteSpace软件,对1990-2020年Web of Science和CNKI数据库中的关键词、文献所属国家、机构、期刊、核心文献与作者进行可视化分析。结果表明,该领域发文量不断增长,其中美国发文量和中心度最高,中国发文量位居第二。国际研究机构中,西班牙高等学术研究委员会中心度最高,中国科学院发文量最高。通过对核心文献共被引和关键词突现及聚类分析发现,AM真菌研究领域不断拓展,研究深度不断增加。20世纪90年代开始,以新种描述、分类系统不断完善及培养技术改进为主;在各地菌种资源库逐步建立后,接种实验及效果评价相关研究逐渐增加;近年来环境变化的加剧使得重金属、干旱与盐胁迫以及植物修复等成为突现词。AM真菌共生的分子机理及与其他微生物的相互作用机制也成为当前研究热点。     

The feature of papers and citation analysis of eleven journals in tropical medicine indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded

To determine the features of papers, authors, and citation of eleven journals in tropical medicine indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded, the database of the Institute for Scientific Information, we analyzed original articles, editorials, reviews, corrections, letters, biographies, and news published in these journals. The results show that these journals covered 107 countries or regions on six continents. The average number of reference was 23.05, with 87.89% of the references from periodicals. The Price Index was 31.43% and the self-citing rate was 7.02%. The references in the first 20 journals ranked by the amount of citation accounted for 36.71% of the total citations. Brazil, United States, India, and England are more advanced in tropical medicine research. The conclusion is that these journals covered most research done in these countries or regions. Most researches were done by cooperation of the researchers, but many of the publications used outdated articles and should include newer information.     

Comparison of Primatological Literature in Latin American, European and African Countries

I compare the primatological literature in 4 Latin American (Brazil, Perú, Mexico and Argentina) 2 European (Great Britain and France) and one African (Kenya) countries with regard to: (1) total number of publications; (2) productivity of scientists; (3) quality of the publications; and (4) the range of subjects studied. Data are from Current Primate References (CPR; 1985–1994). Publications included in the sample show an address from the countries considered. The results showed that GB and France had a far larger number of publications than the other countries. They have respectively >7 and 4 times more authors than Brazil, the country with the highest number of authors among Latin American and African countries. But the mean number of publications per author shows little difference among the 7 countries. The quality of publications as measured by the percentage indexed by ISI shows that, GB and France fare much better than the Latin American countries. Kenya did not follow the pattern of the other underdeveloped countries and showed a high percentage of indexed publications. Not all subjects reviewed in CPR were studied by scientists from the 7 countries. GB and France presented the widest range of subjects. Scientists in countries with greater primate diversity concentrated their publications in behavior, ecology and conservation, colony management and general primatology with the exception of Kenya. These results suggest that scientific production in Latin American countries can be increased by increasing the number of scientists, either through educational programs or via incentives for the career. However, more specific action is needed to improve the quality of publications and the range of subjects studied.     

Psychotherapies for depression in low‐ and middle‐income countries: a meta‐analysis

Most psychotherapies for depression have been developed in high‐income Western countries of North America, Europe and Australia. A growing number of randomized trials have examined the effects of these treatments in non‐Western countries. We conducted a meta‐analysis of these studies to examine whether these psychotherapies are effective and to compare their effects between studies from Western and non‐Western countries. We conducted systematic searches in bibliographical databases and included 253 randomized controlled trials, of which 32 were conducted in non‐Western countries. The effects of psychotherapies in non‐Western countries were large (g=1.10; 95% CI: 0.91‐1.30), with high heterogeneity (I²=90; 95% CI: 87‐92). After adjustment for publication bias, the effect size dropped to g=0.73 (95% CI: 0.51‐0.96). Subgroup analyses did not indicate that adaptation to the local situation was associated with the effect size. Comparisons with the studies in Western countries showed that the effects of the therapies were significantly larger in non‐Western countries, also after adjusting for characteristics of the participants, the treatments and the studies. These larger effect sizes in non‐Western countries may reflect true differences indicating that therapies are indeed more effective; or may be explained by the care‐as‐usual control conditions in non‐Western countries, often indicating that no care was available; or may be the result of the relative low quality of many trials in the field. This study suggests that psychotherapies that were developed in Western countries may or may not be more effective in non‐Western countries, but they are probably no less effective and can therefore also be used in these latter countries.     

Bridging the gaps between research,policy and practice in low- and middle-income countries: a survey of health care providers

Background

Gaps continue to exist between research-based evidence and clinical practice. We surveyed health care providers in 10 low- and middle-income countries about their use of research-based evidence and examined factors that may facilitate or impede such use.

Methods

We surveyed 1499 health care providers practising in one of four areas relevant to the Millennium Development Goals (prevention of malaria, care of women seeking contraception, care of children with diarrhea and care of patients with tuberculosis) in each of China, Ghana, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Laos, Mexico, Pakistan, Senegal and Tanzania.

Results

The proportion of respondents who reported that research was likely to change their clinical practice if performed and published in their own country (84.6% and 86.0% respectively) was higher than the proportion who reported the same about research and publications from their region (66.4% and 63.1%) or from high-income countries (55.8% and 55.5%). Respondents who were most likely to report that the use of research-based evidence led to changes in their practice included those who reported using clinical practice guidelines in paper format (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03–2.28), using scientific journals from their own country in paper format (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.26–2.28), viewing the quality of research performed in their country as above average or excellent (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.16–3.22); trusting systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.08–2.35); and having easy access to the Internet (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.19–3.02).

Interpretation

Locally conducted or published research has played an important role in changing the professional practice of health care providers surveyed in low- and middle-income countries. Increased investments in local research, or at least in locally adapted publications of research-based evidence from other settings, are therefore needed. Although access to the Internet was viewed as a significant factor in whether research-based evidence led to concrete changes in practice, few respondents reported having easy access to the Internet. Therefore, efforts to improve Internet access in clinical settings need to be accelerated.Gaps continue to exist between evidence generated by clinical research and practice.¹ Efforts to improve access to health information in low- and middle-income countries² and a greater knowledge of how to support the use of research evidence in clinical practice have made little difference. The health consequences of these gaps can be particularly profound when highly effective interventions exist. For example, in the 42 countries in which 90% of the deaths involving children worldwide occurred in 2000, nearly 2.2 million deaths among those under five years of age could have been prevented through the universal use of oral rehydration therapy in those with diarrhea and the use of insecticide-treated materials to prevent malaria.³We conducted this study to examine the use of research-based evidence in defined clinical areas in a sample of health care providers in 10 low- and middle-income countries. We also examined factors that may facilitate or impede such use.     

A Comprehensive Survey of Retracted Articles from the Scholarly Literature

Background

The number of retracted scholarly articles has risen precipitously in recent years. Past surveys of the retracted literature each limited their scope to articles in PubMed, though many retracted articles are not indexed in PubMed. To understand the scope and characteristics of retracted articles across the full spectrum of scholarly disciplines, we surveyed 42 of the largest bibliographic databases for major scholarly fields and publisher websites to identify retracted articles. This study examines various trends among them.

Results

We found, 4,449 scholarly publications retracted from 1928–2011. Unlike Math, Physics, Engineering and Social Sciences, the percentages of retractions in Medicine, Life Science and Chemistry exceeded their percentages among Web of Science (WoS) records. Retractions due to alleged publishing misconduct (47%) outnumbered those due to alleged research misconduct (20%) or questionable data/interpretations (42%). This total exceeds 100% since multiple justifications were listed in some retraction notices. Retraction/WoS record ratios vary among author affiliation countries. Though widespread, only miniscule percentages of publications for individual years, countries, journals, or disciplines have been retracted. Fifteen prolific individuals accounted for more than half of all retractions due to alleged research misconduct, and strongly influenced all retraction characteristics. The number of articles retracted per year increased by a factor of 19.06 from 2001 to 2010, though excluding repeat offenders and adjusting for growth of the published literature decreases it to a factor of 11.36.

Conclusions

Retracted articles occur across the full spectrum of scholarly disciplines. Most retracted articles do not contain flawed data; and the authors of most retracted articles have not been accused of research misconduct. Despite recent increases, the proportion of published scholarly literature affected by retraction remains very small. Articles and editorials discussing retractions, or their relation to research integrity, should always consider individual cases in these broad contexts. However, better mechanisms are still needed for raising researchers’ awareness of the retracted literature in their field.     

Ethnic Differences in Neonatal Body Composition in a Multi-Ethnic Population and the Impact of Parental Factors: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Background

Neonates from low and middle income countries (LAMIC) tend to have lower birth weight compared with Western European (WE) neonates. Parental height, BMI and maternal parity, age and educational level often differ according to ethnic background, and are associated with offspring birth weight. Less is known about how these factors affect ethnic differences in neonatal body composition.

Objectives

To explore differences in neonatal body composition in a multi-ethnic population, and the impact of key parental factors on these differences.

Methods

A population-based cohort study of pregnant mothers, fathers and their offspring, living in Oslo, Norway. Gender- and gestational-specific z-scores were calculated for several anthropometric measurements, with the neonates of WE ethnic origin as reference. Mean z-scores for neonates with LAMIC origin, and their parents, are presented as outcome variables.

Results

537 singleton, term neonates and their parents were included. All anthropometric measurements were smaller in neonates with LAMIC origin. Abdominal circumference and ponderal index differed the most from WE (mean z-score: −0.57 (95% CI:−0.69 to −0.44) and −0.54 (−0.66 to −0.44), and remained so after adjusting for parental size. Head circumference and skin folds differed less, and length the least (−0.21 (−0.35 to −0.07)). These measures became comparable to WEs when adjusted for parental factors.

Conclusions

LAMIC origin neonates were relatively “thin-fat”, as indicated by reduced AC and ponderal index and relatively preserved length and skin folds, compared with neonates with WE origin. This phenotype may predispose to type 2 diabetes.     

A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior

Alongside the growing concerns regarding predatory journal growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. Among them, we explored the usefulness of the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index (level of inequality in the distribution of authorship among authors) as tools to identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors. We examined whether the PPMP, complemented by the Gini index, could be useful for identifying cases of potential editorial bias, using all articles in a sample of 5,468 biomedical journals indexed in the National Library of Medicine. For articles published between 2015 and 2019, the median PPMP was 2.9%, and 5% of journal exhibited a PPMP of 10.6% or more. Among the journals with the highest PPMP or Gini index values, where a few authors were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications, a random sample was manually examined, revealing that the most prolific author was part of the editorial board in 60 cases (61%). The papers by the most prolific authors were more likely to be accepted for publication within 3 weeks of their submission. Results of analysis on a subset of articles, excluding nonresearch articles, were consistent with those of the principal analysis. In most journals, publications are distributed across a large number of authors. Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications. To enhance trust in their practices, journals need to be transparent about their editorial and peer review practices.

Alongside the growing concerns regarding predatory journal growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. This study explores the relationship between hyper-prolific authors and a journal’s editorial team, finding a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications.     

Global Cardiovascular Research Output,Citations, and Collaborations: A Time-Trend,Bibliometric Analysis (1999–2008)

Introduction

Health research is one mechanism to improve population-level health and should generally match the health needs of populations. However, there have been limited data to assess the trends in national-level cardiovascular research output, even as cardiovascular disease [CVD] has become the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.

Materials and Methods

We performed a time trends analysis of cardiovascular research publications (1999–2008) downloaded from Web of Knowledge using a iteratively-tested cardiovascular bibliometric filter with >90% precision and recall. We evaluated cardiovascular research publications, five-year running actual citation indices [ACIs], and degree of international collaboration measured through the ratio of the fractional count of addresses from one country against all addresses for each publication.

Results and Discussion

Global cardiovascular publication volume increased from 40 661 publications in 1999 to 55 284 publications in 2008, which represents a 36% increase. The proportion of cardiovascular publications from high-income, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] countries declined from 93% to 84% of the total share over the study period. High-income, OECD countries generally had higher fractional counts, which suggest less international collaboration, than lower income countries from 1999–2008. There was an inverse relationship between cardiovascular publications and age-standardized CVD morbidity and mortality rates, but a direct, curvilinear relationship between cardiovascular publications and Human Development Index from 1999–2008.

Conclusions

Cardiovascular health research output has increased substantially in the past decade, with a greater share of citations being published from low- and middle-income countries. However, low- and middle-income countries with the higher burdens of cardiovascular disease continue to have lower research output than high-income countries, and thus require targeted research investments to improve cardiovascular health.     

Full publication of papers presented at the 1995 through 1999 European Association of Plastic Surgeons annual scientific meetings: a systemic bibliometric analysis

From the multitude of oral presentations at major medical meetings, the most informative and highest-quality studies make it to full publication in peer-reviewed journals. The rate of publication may be regarded as an indicator of the scientific level of the meeting. Study of the publication rates of consecutive annual meetings allows for the evaluation of the consistency of the scientific level of these meetings and for comparison with publication rates of other meetings in the same field of interest. To grade how useful any publication is to other authors, one can furthermore measure how frequently they cite it in their own publications. Finally, the time lag between oral presentation and full publication is of importance to both its authors and the audience at the meeting. The main objectives of this study were to determine the publication rate of papers of various fields of interest as presented at five consecutive annual meetings of the European Association of Plastic Surgeons (EURAPS) and the time lag between these presentations and their publication. The authors compared their overall findings to those reported for other surgical specialties. Moreover, they identified and classified the journals in which the full publications appeared as an indicator of the scientific value of the meeting. They conclude that a greater than average number of papers presented at the 1995 through 1999 annual EURAPS meetings went on to full publication in peer-reviewed journals. Among these journals, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was the best source for information presented at the meetings. Although approximately 90 percent of the publications appeared before 3 years had passed after a meeting, additional publications may be expected to appear even more than 6 years after the meeting. Given the high publication rate and the high average normalized impact factor of the journals in which the presentations appeared, the five studied EURAPS meetings overall had high scientific value.     

More topics from the tropics: additional thoughts to Mammides et al.

Most studies on tropical conservation questions are conducted by researchers of developed countries from the north. This geographic disconnection was recently criticised by Mammides et al. Here, we reflect on their findings and add further views from scientist’s and journal editor’s perspectives. We argue that journals are, a priori, most strongly interested in research questions and approaches that will likely increase their scientific impact and prestige. This is rarely compatible with publishing articles on questions with restricted global impact or based on single taxa. We question whether small changes in the editorial policy of international conservation journals will considerably improve the geographic diversity in key conservation publications. Rather, thematic scopes of the leading conservation journals should be modified, preferably in close collaboration with leading conservationists from the south. We are convinced that long-term investments in the tropics will create a stronger local scientific community, thus bolstering academic morale, and finally may lead to an increase in the submission and acceptance rate of articles written from scientists from these regions.     

Emerging journals. The benefits of and challenges for publishing scientific journals in and by emerging countries

Emerging countries have established national scientific journals as an alternative publication route for their researchers. However, these journals eventually need to catch up to international standards.Since the first scientific journal was founded—The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1665—the number of journals dedicated to publishing academic research has literally exploded. The Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge database alone—which represents far less than the total number of academic journals—includes more than 11,000 journals from non-profit, society and commercial publishers, published in numerous languages and with content ranging from the natural sciences to the social sciences and humanities. Notwithstanding the sheer scale and diversity of academic publishing, however, there is a difference between the publishing enterprise in developed countries and emerging countries in terms of the commercial rationale behind the journals.…‘national'' or even ‘local'' journals are published and supported because they report important, practical information that would be declined by international journals…Although all academic journals seek to serve their readership by publishing the highest quality and most interesting advances, a growing trend in the twentieth century has also seen publishers in developed countries viewing academic publishing as a way of generating profit, and the desire of journal editors to publish the best and most interesting science thereby serves the commercial interest of publishers who want people to buy the publication.In emerging countries, however, there are few commercial reasons to publish a journal. Instead, ‘national'' or even ‘local'' journals are published and supported because they report important, practical information that would be declined by international journals, either because the topic is of only local or marginal interest, or because the research does not meet the high standards for publication at an international level. Consequently, most ‘national'' journals are not able to finance themselves and depend on public funding. In Brazil, for instance, the national journals account for one-third of the publications of all scientific articles from Brazil and are mostly funded by the government. Other emerging countries that invest in research—notably China, India and Russia—also have a sizable number of national journals, most of which are published in their native language.There is little competition between developed countries to publish the most or the best scientific journals. There is clear competition between the top-flight journals—Nature and Science, for example—but this competition is academically and/or commercially, rather than nationally, based. In fact, countries with similar scientific calibres in terms of the research they generate, differ greatly in terms of the number of journals published within their borders. According to the Thomson Reuters database, for example, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden published 847, 202 and 30 scientific journal, respectively, in 2010—the Netherlands has been a traditional haven for publishers. However, the number of articles published by researchers in these countries in journals indexed by Thomson Reuters—a rough measurement of scientific productivity—does not differ significantly.To overcome the perceived dominance of international journals […] some emerging countries have increased the number of national journalsScientists who edit directly or serve on the editorial boards of high-quality, international journals have a major responsibility because they guide the direction and set the standards of scientific research. In deciding what to publish, they define the quality of research, promote emerging research areas and set the criteria by which research is judged to be new and exciting; they are the gatekeepers of science. The distribution of these scientists also reflects the division between developed and emerging countries in scientific publishing. Using the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden as examples, they respectively contributed 235, 256 and 160 scientists to the editorial teams or boards of 220 high-impact, selected journals in 2005 (Braun & Diospatonyi, 2005). These numbers are comparable with the scientific production of these countries in terms of publications. On the other hand, Brazil, South Korea and Russia, countries as scientifically productive in terms of total number of articles as the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden, contributed only 28, 29 and 55 ‘gatekeepers'', respectively. A principal reason for this difference is, of course, the more variable quality of the science produced in emerging countries, but it is nevertheless clear that their scientists are under-represented on the teams that define the course and standards of scientific research.To overcome the perceived dominance of international journals, and to address the significant barriers to getting published that their scientists face, some emerging countries have increased the number of national journals (Sumathipala et al, 2004). Such barriers have been well documented and include poor written English and the generally lower or more variable quality of the science produced in emerging countries. However, although English, which is the lingua franca of modern science (Meneghini & Packer, 2007), is not as great a barrier as some would claim, there is some evidence of a conscious or subconscious bias among reviewers and editors in judging articles from emerging countries. (Meneghini et al, 2008; Sumathipala et al, 2004).A third pressure has also forced some emerging countries to introduce more national journals in which to publish academic research from within their borders: greater scientific output. During the past two or three decades, several of these countries have made huge investments into research—notably China, India and Brazil, among others—which has enormously increased their scientific productivity. Initially, the new national journals aspired to adopt the rigid rules of peer review and the quality standards of international journals, but this approach did not produce satisfactory results in terms of the quality of papers published. On the one hand, it is hard for national journals to secure the expertise of scientists competent to review their submissions; on the other, the reviewers who do agree tend to be more lenient, ostensibly believing that peer review as rigorous as that of international journals would run counter to the purpose of making scientific results publicly available, at least on the national level.The establishment of national journals has, in effect, created two parallel communication streams for scientists in emerging countries: publication in international journals—the selective route—and publication in national journals—the regional route. On the basis of their perceived chances to be accepted by an international journal, authors can choose the route that gives them the best opportunity to make their results public. Economic conditions are also important as the resources to produce national journals come from government, so national journals can face budget cuts in times of austerity. In the worst case, this can lead to the demise of national journals to the disadvantage of authors who have built their careers by publishing in them.…to not publish, for any reason, is to break the process of science and potentially inhibit progressThere is some anecdotal evidence that authors who often or almost exclusively publish in international journals hold national journals in some contempt—they regard them as a way of avoiding the effort and hassle of publishing internationally. Moreover, although the way in which governments regard and support the divergent routes varies between countries, in general, scientists who endure and succeed through the selective route often receive more prestige and have more influence in shaping national science policies. Conversely, authors who choose the regional publication route regard their efforts as an important contribution to the dissemination of information generated by the national scientific community, which might otherwise remain locked away—by either language or access policies. Either way, it is worth mentioning that publication is obviously not the end point of a scientific discovery: the results should feed into the pool of knowledge and might inspire other researchers to pursue new avenues or devise new experiments. Hence, to not publish, for any reason, is to break the process of science and potentially inhibit progress.The choice of pursuing publication in regional or international journals also has direct consequences for the research being published. The selective, international route ensures greater visibility, especially if the paper is published in a high-impact journal. The regional route also makes the results and experiments public, but it fails to attract international visibility, in particular if the research is not published in English.It seems that, for the foreseeable future, this scenario will not change. If it is to change, however, then the revolution must be driven by the national journals. In fact, a change that raises the quality and value of national journals would be prudent because it would give scientists from emerging countries the opportunity to sit on the editorial boards of, or referee for, the resulting high-quality national journals. In this way, the importance of national journals would be enhanced and scientists from emerging countries would invest effort and gain experience in serving as editors or referees.The regional route has various weaknesses, however, the most important of which is the peer-review process. Peer-review at national journals is simply of a lower standard owing to several factors that include a lack of training in objective research assessment, greater leniency and tolerance of poor-quality science, and an unwillingness by top researchers to participate because they prefer to give their time to the selective journals. This creates an awkward situation: on the one hand, the inability to properly assess submissions, and on the other hand, a lack of motivation to do so.Notwithstanding these difficulties, most editors and authors of national journals hope that their publications will ultimately be recognized as visible, reliable sources of information, and not only as instruments to communicate national research to the public. In other words, their aspiration is not only to publish good science—albeit of lesser interest to international journals—but also to attain the second or third quartiles of impact factors in their areas. These journals should eventually be good enough to compete with the international ones, mitigating their national character and attracting authors from other countries.The key is to raise the assessment procedures at national journals to international standards, and to professionalize their operations. Both goals are interdependent. The vast majority of national journals are published by societies and research organizations and their editorial structures are often limited to local researchers. As a result, they are shoestring operations that lack proper administrative support and international input, and can come across as amateurish. The SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), which indexes national journals and measures their quality, can require certain changes when it indexes a journal, including the requirement to internationalize the editorial body or board.…experienced international editors should be brought in to strengthen national journals, raise their quality and educate local editors…In terms of improving this status quo, a range of other changes could be introduced. First, more decision-making authority should be given to publishers to decide how to structure the editorial body. The choice of ad hoc assistants—that is, professional scientists who can lend expertise at the editorial level should be selected by the editors—who should also assess journal performance. Moreover, publishers should try to attract international scientists with editorial experience to join a core group of two or three chief or senior editors. Their English skills, their experience in their research field and their influence in the community would catalyse a rapid improvement of the journals and their quality. In other words, experienced international editors should be brought in to strengthen national journals, raise their quality and educate local editors with the long-term objective to join the international scientific editing community. It would eventually merge the national and the selective routes of publishing into a single international route of scientific communication.Of course, there is a long way to go. The problem is that many societies and organizations do not have sufficient resources—money or experience—to attract international scientists as editors. However, new publishing and financial models could provide incentives to attract this kind of expertise. Ultimately, relying on government money alone is neither a reliable nor sufficient source of income to make national journals successful. One way of enhancing revenue streams might be to switch to an open-access model that would charge author fees that could be reinvested to improve the journals. In Brazil, for instance, almost all journals have adopted the open access model (Hedlund et al, 2004). The author fees—around US$1,250—if adopted, would provide financial support for increasing the quality and performance of the journals. Moreover, increased competition between journals at a national level should create a more dynamic and competitive situation among journals, raising the general quality of the science they publish. This would also feed back to the scientific community and help to raise the general standards of science in emerging countries.     

Impact of GDP,Spending on R&D,Number of Universities and Scientific Journals on Research Publications among Asian Countries

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the impact of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, spending on Research and Development (R&D), number of universities, and Indexed Scientific Journals on total number of research documents (papers), citations per document and Hirsch index (H-index) in various science and social science subjects among Asian countries.

Materials and Methods

In this study, 40 Asian countries were included. The information regarding Asian countries, their GDP per capita, spending on R&D, total number of universities and indexed scientific journals were collected. We recorded the bibliometric indicators, including total number of research documents, citations per document and H-index in various science and social sciences subjects during the period 1996–2011. The main sources for information were World Bank, SCI-mago/Scopus and Web of Science; Thomson Reuters.

Results

The mean per capita GDP for all the Asian countries is 14448.31±2854.40 US$, yearly per capita spending on R&D 0.64±0.16 US$, number of universities 72.37±18.32 and mean number of ISI indexed journal per country is 17.97±7.35. The mean of research documents published in various science and social science subjects among all the Asian countries during the period 1996–2011 is 158086.92±69204.09; citations per document 8.67±0.48; and H-index 122.8±19.21. Spending on R&D, number of universities and indexed journals have a positive correlation with number of published documents, citations per document and H-index in various science and social science subjects. However, there was no association between the per capita GDP and research outcomes.

Conclusion

The Asian countries who spend more on R&D have a large number of universities and scientific indexed journals produced more in research outcomes including total number of research publication, citations per documents and H-index in various science and social science subjects.     

Remote sensing of ecosystem services: A systematic review

Appropriate integration of remote sensing technologies into ecosystem services concepts and practices leads to potential practical benefits for the protection of biodiversity and the promotion of sustainable use of Earth's natural assets. The last decade has seen the rapid development of research efforts on the topic of ecosystem services, which has led to a significant increase in the number of scientific publications. This systematic review aims to identify, evaluate and synthesise the evidence provided in published peer reviewed studies framing their work in the context of spatially explicit remote sensing assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. Initially, a search through indexed scientific databases found 5920 papers making direct and/or indirect reference to the topic of “ecosystem services” between the years of 1960 and 2013. Among these papers, 211 make direct reference to the use of remote sensing. During the search we aimed at selecting papers that were peer-reviewed publications available through indexed bibliographic databases. For this reason, our literature search did not include books, grey literature, extended abstracts and presentations. We quantitatively present the growth of remote sensing applications in ecosystem services’ research, reviewing the literature to produce a summary of the state of available and feasible remote sensing variables used in the assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. The results provide valuable information on how remotely sensed Earth observation data are used currently to produce spatially-explicit assessments and valuation of ecosystem services. Using examples from the literature we produce a concise summary of what has been done, what can be done and what can be improved upon in the future to integrate remote sensing into ecosystem services research. The reason for doing so is to motivate discussion about methodological challenges, solutions and to encourage an uptake of remote sensing technology and data where it has potential practical applications.     

Post‐traumatic stress disorder: a state‐of‐the‐art review of evidence and challenges

Post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is arguably the most common psychiatric disorder to arise after exposure to a traumatic event. Since its formal introduction in the DSM‐III in 1980, knowledge has grown significantly regarding its causes, maintaining mechanisms and treatments. Despite this increased understanding, however, the actual definition of the disorder remains controversial. The DSM‐5 and ICD‐11 define the disorder differently, reflecting disagreements in the field about whether the construct of PTSD should encompass a broad array of psychological manifestations that arise after trauma or should be focused more specifically on trauma memory phenomena. This controversy over clarifying the phenotype of PTSD has limited the capacity to identify biomarkers and specific mechanisms of traumatic stress. This review provides an up‐to‐date outline of the current definitions of PTSD, its known prevalence and risk factors, the main models to explain the disorder, and evidence‐supported treatments. A major conclusion is that, although trauma‐focused cognitive behavior therapy is the best‐validated treatment for PTSD, it has stagnated over recent decades, and only two‐thirds of PTSD patients respond adequately to this intervention. Moreover, most people with PTSD do not access evidence‐based treatment, and this situation is much worse in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Identifying processes that can overcome these major barriers to better management of people with PTSD remains an outstanding challenge.     

The Global Inventor Gap: Distribution and Equality of World-Wide Inventive Effort, 1990–2010

Applying distance-to-frontier analysis, we have used 2.9 million patents and population data to assess whether the relative capacity of world countries and major regions to create new knowledge and technology has become globally more equal or less equal between 1990 and 2010. We show with the Gini coefficient that the global distribution of inventors has become more equal between major countries and regions. However, this trend has been largely due to the improved performance of only two major countries, China and India. The worst performing regions, totalling a population of almost 2 billion, are actually falling behind. Our results suggest that substantial parts of the global population have fallen further behind countries at the global frontier in their ability to create new knowledge and inventions, and that the catch-up among the least developed and middle-income countries is highly uneven, prompting questions about the nature and future of the global knowledge economy.     

Detecting mental disorders in primary care

Managing mental health problems of people around the world is a major challenge for health workers as well as for policy makers. It is a particular problem for low- and middle-income countries for many reasons, especially due to lack of recourses.A computer-assisted interview, the GMHAT/PC (Global Mental Health Assessment Tool - Primary Care) has been developed to assist general practitioners and other health professionals to make a quick, convenient, and comprehensive, standardised mental health assessment. It has proved to be a reliable and valid tool in various studies. Its use by other health professionals may help in detecting and managing mental disorders in primary care and general health settings more effectively. The article outlines the development and potential use of the GMHAT/PC.     

Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE--To examine the sensitivity and precision of Medline searching for randomised clinical trials. DESIGN--Comparison of results of Medline searches to a "gold standard" of known randomised clinical trials in ophthalmology published in 1988; systematic review (meta-analysis) of results of similar, but separate, studies from many fields of medicine. POPULATIONS--Randomised clinical trials published in 1988 in journals indexed in Medline, and those not indexed in Medline and identified by hand search, comprised the gold standard. Gold standards for the other studies combined in the meta-analysis were based on: randomised clinical trials published in any journal, whether indexed in Medline or not; those published in any journal indexed in Medline; or those published in a selected group of journals indexed in Medline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Sensitivity (proportion of the total number of known randomised clinical trials identified by the search) and precision (proportion of publications retrieved by Medline that were actually randomised clinical trials) were calculated for each study and combined to obtain weighted means. Searches producing the "best" sensitivity were used for sensitivity and precision estimates when multiple searches were performed. RESULTS--The sensitivity of searching for ophthalmology randomised clinical trials published in 1988 was 82%, when the gold standard was for any journal, 87% for any journal indexed in Medline, and 88% for selected journals indexed in Medline. Weighted means for sensitivity across all studies were 51%, 77%, and 63%, respectively. The weighted mean for precision was 8% (median 32.5%). Most searchers seemed not to use freetext subject terms and truncation of those terms. CONCLUSION--Although the indexing terms available for searching Medline for randomised clinical trials have improved, sensitivity still remains unsatisfactory. A mechanism is needed to "''register" known trials, preferably by retrospective tagging of Medline entries, and incorporating trials published before 1966 and in journals not indexed by Medline into the system.     

What data analytics can or cannot do for climate change studies: An inventory of interactive visual tools

Currently, there is extensive usage of climate datasets aimed at predicting future climate variability and its impacts on the environment, economy, and society. To gain insights into the landscape of interactive visual tools built to compare and analyze climate data, a study of publications from 1990 to 2021 is performed. The survey establishes the evolution of publications, most frequently used keywords, evolution of citations, and the most productive research categories, authors, institutions, journals/publishers, and countries. Furthermore, a keyword co-occurrence analysis is conducted to reveal research trends as well as gaps that require further development. Particularly, it is found that analytical tools that visualize and compare climate modelling data with their historically observed values remain by far an underexplored area within the domain.