Biology 430/431 - Anatomy & Physiology (Rogers)

Although publication in scholarly peer-reviewed journals remains the gold standard for communication of findings in the life sciences, the gold has been debased in the digital age by various impurities, including (a) reviewer fatigue, (b) fraud, paper mills, and the perils of artificial intelligence, (c) predatory journals, (d) the ongoing use of journal impact factor (IF) as a proxy for individual article quality, and (e) salami-slicing and other unethical practices. This article presents a detailed overview of these problems, as well as solutions proposed and implemented to counter them.

This guide from Purdue University is designed to help those publishing their research by explaining the various processes and tools used in academic publishing and how their research output is analyzed. It also shares best practices for managing one's online academic identity.

The aim of this study is to assess the determinants of citation and how these compare across six different biomedical research fields. Citation network analyses were performed for six biomedical research questions. After identifying all relevant publications, all potential citations were mapped together with the actually performed citations in each network. As determinants of citation we assessed the following: study outcome, study design, sample size, journal impact factor, gender, affiliation, authority and continent of the corresponding author, funding source, title of the publication, number of references, and self-citation.

This article discusses an emerging movement that aims to push researchers to pay more heed to inequities in scholarly citations.

This paper presents a percentile-distribution-based proposal for assessing the
influence of scientific journals and publications that corrects several of the IF’s main technical
limitations using the same set of documents as is used to calculate the IF.

Here is an international effort to reform the metrics & tools used.