How fast is the peer-review process for orthopaedic publications related to the Covid-19 pandemic?

Khalifa, Ahmed A.; Ahmed, Ahmed M.

doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2020.09.007

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, studies found that during the first months of the pandemic, over one thousand COVID-19 articles were published, with only less than 300 articles being original research ( Gazendam et al., 2020 ; Kambakamba et al., 2020 ). In addition, the fast speed of peer-review/publication for medical papers undermined their scientific quality: for the journals where the COVID-19 articles were published, the median duration for a regular peer review was fifty-six days, while the median for COVID-19 related articles was only eight days ( Khalifa and Ahmed, 2021 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis

Pian

Chi

2021

Information Processing & Management

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis

Pian

Chi

2021

Information Processing & Management

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The frequency of secondary COVID-19 publications may also contribute to the number of secondary article retractions. 16 , 21 , 22 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The frequency of secondary COVID-19 publications may also contribute to the number of secondary article retractions. 16,21,22 Reasons for removal varied drastically across studies. Most studies (other than those whose reasons were unspecified) were removed for being duplications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic Journal Retractions and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Anderson

Nugent

Peterson

2021

J Prim Care Community Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic has produced an unprecedented amount of scientific research, with over 100,000 articles on the SARS-COV2 virus or the associated pandemic published within the first year. To effectively disseminate such a large volume of research, some academic journal publishers altered their review criteria, and many articles were made available before undergoing a traditional review process. However, with this rapid influx of information, multiple COVID-19 articles have been retracted or withdrawn. Some researchers have expressed concern that these retractions call into question the validity of an expedited review process and the overall quality of the larger body of COVID-19 research. We examined 68 removed articles and determined that many of the articles were removed for unknown reasons (n = 22) or as duplications (n = 12); 24 papers were retracted for more significant reasons (data integrity, plagiarism, reporting or analysis, and IRB or privacy issues). The majority of removed papers were from the USA (n = 23) and China (n = 19).

show abstract

“…)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19); the most commonly occurring was pattern , where the authors mistakenly reported their a liation reporting which was reported in 47 (44.8 %) articles.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Author’s affiliation misreporting patterns, a cross-sectional evaluation of Qena Faculty of Medicine (QFM) PubMed indexed publication in 2020 as an example of Egyptian academic institutes.

Khalifa

Hussien

Ansary

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The scientific activity of an institution or an individual researcher is being measured through various indicators; of which is their amount or publication and citation. Inappropriate presentation or reporting of the authors' affiliation may deprive their institution of getting the research credit for the published work. The study primary objective was to detect the possible patterns of authors' affiliation misreporting by evaluation Qena Faculty of medicine (QFM) (as a representative of Egyptian academic institutions) PubMed indexed publications over one year period. The Secondary objectives were to, 1: document the QFM contribution to the South Valley University (SVU) publications and 2: to check the incidence of contribution from QFM different departments through the same period. Results A PubMed search limited to one year searching for publications from SVU, QFM and QUH. The resulted articles were examined to evaluate the contribution of different faculties to the overall SVU publications. QFM and QUH were further evaluated for, contribution of the departments, and the presence of authors affiliation misreporting, the later was divided into three main patterns, Ⅰ: Missing affiliation information, Ⅱ: Mistakes in affiliation reporting, and Ⅲ: Inconsistent affiliation reporting. A total of 261 articles were examined. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine was the most contributing by 95 (35.2 %) articles followed by QFM by 77 (28.4 %). For the 77 articles published from QFM and QUH, the cooperation between QFM departments was as follows: authors from only one department (59, 76.6%), two (9, 11.7%), three (4, 5.2%), and four (5, 6.5%), this makes a total contribution of all departments as 105 articles, of which 83.8% and 16.2% from clinical and academic departments respectively. The most commonly occurring authors affiliation misreporting was pattern Ⅱ in 47 (44.8 %) articles, followed by pattern Ⅲ in 31 (29.5%) pattern and pattern Ⅰ in 16 (15.2%). Conclusions Certain patterns of authors' affiliation misreporting were detected; identifying such patterns will help avoid them in future and to guard against depriving a certain institution of its research credit. Further evaluation of other faculties or universities on a wider scale is highly encouraged.

show abstract

How fast is the peer-review process for orthopaedic publications related to the Covid-19 pandemic?

Cited by 12 publications

References 16 publications

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis

The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis

Academic Journal Retractions and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author’s affiliation misreporting patterns, a cross-sectional evaluation of Qena Faculty of Medicine (QFM) PubMed indexed publication in 2020 as an example of Egyptian academic institutes.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About