共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 656 毫秒
1.
Quan‐Hoang Vuong 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(2):119-130
While researchers with retracted papers – publications that are withdrawn because of significant errors or scientific misconduct – carry a permanent stain on their publishing records, understanding the causes and initiators of such retractions can shed a different light on the matter. This paper, based on a random sample of 2,046 retracted papers, which were published between 1975 and 2019, extracted from Retraction Watch and the websites of major publishers, shows that 53% of the retraction notices do not specify who initiated the retraction. Nearly 10% of the retraction notes either omit or do not contain information related to reasons for retractions. Furthermore, most of the retracted papers in our sample have no limitation section; those who do are commonly unhelpful or irrelevant. The results carry three implications for scientific transparency: retraction notices need to be more informative; limitation sections ought to be a required and even an open section of all published articles; and finally, promoting ‘heroic acts’ in science can positively change the current publishing culture. 相似文献
2.
通过对国内外医学期刊撤稿现象的调查,探讨撤稿的主要原因,并通过对国内外相关的理论及实践操作规范的考察,对我国医学期刊撤稿的操作流程提出建议。还探讨撤稿过程中期刊和编辑的作用,为今后相关的理论研究及实际操作提供参考。 相似文献
3.
Michel C. Atlas 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2004,92(2):242-250
Purpose: The purpose is to review the issue of retraction in the scientific literature and to examine the policies on retraction of major biomedical journals.Method: The historical background of this issue was investigated through a literature search. The Instructions to Authors of 122 major biomedical journals were reviewed for evidence of a policy on the retraction of articles. Editors of those journals with no mention of retraction in their Instructions to Authors were contacted by email and/or postal mail.Results: Sixty-two percent of the journals investigated did not post or report having a policy on issuing retractions. Only twenty-one (18%) did. The remainder did not post any policy and did not respond to inquiries.Discussion: Including policies in Instructions to Authors relating to the principled conduct of research and publication will improve the ethical environment in which the scientific community works. 相似文献
4.
5.
Trust has traditionally been a cornerstone of traditional science publishing. However, events over the past few years, an increase in the number of retractions and the fortification of the vigilant science movement, coupled with better tools to detect and report or publicize misconduct and/or errors in the literature, has revealed that this pillar of trust has in fact not always been present, or has been severely abused or compromised. Further disintegration in the integrity of academic publishing by no or almost non-existent peer review in so-called “predatory” open access publishers has given reason to increasingly distrust the accuracy of the published academic record. Finally, a topic that tends to invoke mixed reactions, but which we feel adds to the overall level of mistrust and erosion of ethical values in science publishing, is the use of stings, hoaxes and irony academic journals. We focus on six such cases, providing a rationale why such studies undermine trust and integrity and why such bogus publications are best left to blogs or non-academic forms of publishing science-related topics. 相似文献
6.
The Transfer Code of Practice was launched in 2008 as a set of best‐practice guidelines to be followed when a journal changes publisher, with the aim of ensuring uninterrupted access to content for subscribers. The Code has now been updated to reflect the continued evolution of the academic publishing process driven by new technologies, policies, and publishing practices. 相似文献
7.
J M Budd M Sievert T R Schultz C Scoville 《Bulletin of the Medical Library Association》1999,87(4):437-443
At times, there are reasons for authors to make a formal statement of retraction of work they publish in biomedical journals. This study examines 235 retracted articles and looks at the reasons for these retractions and citations to the articles subsequent to retraction. The primary reasons for retraction are error of various kinds (such as problems with method or sample, including contamination of samples) and misconduct. The 235 articles are cited a total of 2,034 times after retraction. This set of citations can be divided into two groups: citations that appear in journals included in the Abridged Index Medicus and those that appear in other journals included in MEDLINE. While most of the citations in these two groups of journals can be categorized as "implicitly positive," 275 make explicitly positive mention of retracted articles. The implications for continued citation for biomedical research and clinical practice are discussed. 相似文献
8.
抗战时期是新民主主义革命时期中国共产党出版业发展的繁盛时期,当时陕甘宁边区的红色图书出版既为普及宣传马克思主义理论及党的方针政策做出积极贡献,又为与国民党文化战线斗争的最终胜利奠定了重要思想文化基础。系统梳理抗战时期陕甘宁边区红色图书的出版发行问题,对推动当今图书发行事业仍有重要借鉴意义。 相似文献
9.
《Journal of Informetrics》2023,17(3):101423
Retractions are necessary to remove flawed research from citable literature but cannot offset the negative impact those publications have on science advances and public trust. The editorial peer-review process is intended to prevent flawed research from being published. However, there is limited empirical evidence of its effectiveness in identifying issues that lead to retractions. This study analyzed the peer-review comments (provided by Clarivate Analytics) for a sample of retracted publications (provided by Retraction Watch) to investigate how the peer-review process effectively detects the areas where the retraction causes lie and whether reviewer characteristics are related to the effectiveness. We found that a small proportion of peer reviews suggested rejections during the peer review stage, while about half suggested acceptance or minor revision for those later retracted papers. The peer-review process was more effective in identifying retraction causes related to data, methods, and results than those related to text plagiarism and references. Additionally, factors such as reviewer seniority and the level of match between reviewers’ expertise and the submission were significant in determining the possibility of peer reviews identifying suspicious areas in submissions. We discussed potential insights from these findings and called for collective efforts to prevent retractions. 相似文献
10.
评述国内外编辑团体出版的各项道德规范,从重复发表、一稿多投、剽窃、未公开的利益冲突、作者署名、数据造假、研究伦理7个方面,比较国际出版道德委员会(COPE)、国际医学期刊编辑委员会(ICMJE)、欧洲科学编辑学会(EASE)制定的道德规范的异同.分析表明:3家机构制定的学术道德规范形式不同,内容各有侧重,但影响力还有提升空间;中国制订科技期刊编辑出版道德规范时应借鉴国内外的成功经验,甄别出期刊编辑关心的核心问题,采用适合的内容和形式,制订符合中国学术出版生态的编辑实践指南;在指南出台后,应积极进行推广培训,切实应用于学术出版中. 相似文献
11.
12.
图书出版物同时具有正负外部性,这使得政府不管是基于管制还是鼓励之下的公共政策拥有内在合理性。随着我国出版产业改革深入,国有出版企业成为市场竞争主体,基于鼓励的各种公共政策应该以推动国有出版企业培养在市场竞争中的自生能力为目标,同时要求政府的各种公共政策必须有合理的行为边界。 相似文献
13.
During the past twenty years, more than ninety retraction notices have been published in biomedical journals. These retractions constitute a unique body of literature that biomedical researchers, bibliographers, and librarians must monitor to reduce scientific use of retracted, invalid papers. An analysis of medical retraction notices shows that very few are prominent in style, format, or placement, in spite of authoritative publication standards formulated by the International Council of Medical Journal Editors. Although researchers are ultimately responsible for the validity of the information they cite in their own publications, biomedical librarians are in a unique position to educate their patrons regarding retracted papers. 相似文献
14.
哥廷根大学开放获取运动的具体举措,涉及开放获取出版、开放获取知识库建设、开放获取项目组织和宣传等各个方面,通过相应的开放获取出版与存储协议、激励政策等机制建设,主持或参与德国、欧洲和全球的开放获取项目及组织来推进开发获取发展,为建设开放获取基础设施和推动欧洲及全球的开放获取进程做出了积极贡献。 相似文献
15.
全国解放初期,中央出版管理部门和一些较大的出版机构掀起一股创办内部刊物的小高潮。这些刊物及时传达党的出版方针、政策,定期公布内部出版计划和工作进度,重视业务交流,注重出版物的质量、发行和读者工作,善于总结经验和不足,加强了出版管理机构和出版单位之间的"政策中介"功能,促进了出版单位内部各部门之间、员工之间的信息沟通和业务交流,对于当时出版单位有计划、抓管理、善经营的良性发展和出版物质量的提升以及出版发行工作迈向新台阶,大有裨益。 相似文献
16.
Peter Binfield 《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(1-2):37-42
Rolnik's preconference went well beyond the “business of publishing from a very basic perspective” as described in the conference program. Rolnik's preconference described the publishing market, operations within publishing companies, and how publishers find content. Dr. Peter Binfield, a guest speaker with expertise in society publishing, complemented the preconference. 相似文献
17.
18.
David L. Armbruster 《International Information and Library Review》2013,45(3-4):341-349
Most biomedical peer-reviewed journal publishers today follow two policies that significantly affect how information is disseminated: reject redundant (or duplicate) publications and embargo information until the day of publication. Electronic information technology has created communication methods that far exceed the traditional paper journal for scientists communicating with peers, the media, and the public. These electronic methods (e.g. the Web and on-line archives) conflict with the publishers' policies regarding redundant publication and embargoed information. However, the biomedical publishing world is changing very rapidly as a result of many forces, including scientists themselves, libraries, budgets, and technology. This paper notes recent changes in publications policies, the ramifications of these policies for different audiences, and future directions for biomedical scholarly publishing. 相似文献
19.
20.
Most biomedical peer-reviewed journal publishers today follow two policies that significantly affect how information is disseminated: reject redundant (or duplicate) publications and embargo information until the day of publication. Electronic information technology has created communication methods that far exceed the traditional paper journal for scientists communicating with peers, the media, and the public. These electronic methods (e.g. the Web and on-line archives) conflict with the publishers' policies regarding redundant publication and embargoed information. However, the biomedical publishing world is changing very rapidly as a result of many forces, including scientists themselves, libraries, budgets, and technology. This paper notes recent changes in publications policies, the ramifications of these policies for different audiences, and future directions for biomedical scholarly publishing. 相似文献