Editorial

Editorial

Editorial

Mythbusters: Self‐Embargo

Deciding to post a manuscript preprint

The ethics and scientific integrity of biomedical and public health research requires that researchers behave in appropriate ways. However, this requires more than following of published research guidelines that seek to prevent scientific misconduct relating to serious deviations from widely accepted scientific norms for proposing, conducting, and reporting research (e.g., fabrication or falsification of research data or failures to report potential conflicts of interest). In this paper we argue for a broader account of scientific integrity, one consistent with that defended by the United States Institute of Medicine, involving a commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility for one's actions as a researcher and to practices consistent with the responsible conduct of research and protection of the research participants. Maintaining high standards of ethical and scientific integrity helps to maintain public trust in the research enterprise. An increasing number of authors have pointed to the importance of mentoring and education in relation to the responsible conduct of science in preventing transgressions of scientific integrity. Just like in clinical research and biomedicine, epidemiologists and other public health researchers have the responsibility to exhibit and foster the very highest standards of scientific integrity.

Patients' rights for privacy and confidentiality extend to publications. This author describes how authors, reviewers, and editors can ensure patient confidentiality in manuscripts.

Dr. William Dietz is correct in pointing out that our support for people-first language in Obesity has been more a case of “talking the talk” than “walking the walk.” We thank Dr. Dietz for bringing this important issue to our attention. We will institute the following changes in our policies for both potential authors and accepted manuscripts. First, we will amend our Author Guidelines, Submission Checklist, and Ethical Policies documents to inform authors of our support for people-first language, including our position that “obese” should not be used to describe individuals. Second, our editorial team will work with authors to change “obese” as an adjective to terms such as “people with obesity” and “populations with obesity.” Such changes will take time and will need careful consideration from both the editorial team and the authors to “walk the walk.”

Journal name – MEDSURG Nursing Publisher – Jannetti Publications, Inc. Journal home page website – http://www.medsurgnursing.net/cgibin/WebObjects/MSNJournal.woa Aim, mission, and target audience – MEDSURG Nursing, the official journal of the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses, is a scholarly journal published six times per year and dedicated to advancing adult health nursing practice, clinical research, and professional development. The journal's goal is to enhance the knowledge and skills of adult health and advanced practice nurses to prevent and manage disease, and to work with patients and their families to improve the health status of the nation's adults. Circulation and Indexing – Circulation is approximately 13,000. The journal is a benefit to the members of the Academy of Medical Surgical Nursing. The journal is also available through the following indexing services: CINAHL, EBSCO Academic Search Premier, Gale, Infotrieve, Ovid, ProQuest, and PubMed. Submission process – Two copies and one disk copy of the manuscript should be submitted to the editorial office (address and details are on the author guidelines on the journal website). Manuscripts not accepted will not be returned unless requested within 30 days of the notification of rejection. MEDSURG Nursing is a refereed journal. All manuscripts submitted undergo review by the editor and blind review by members of the manuscript review panel and/or editorial board members. Each manuscript is reviewed on its timeliness, importance, clarity, accuracy, and applicability to adult health/medical-surgical nursing. Upon acceptance of the manuscript, the author will yield copyright to MEDSURG Nursing. Acquiring permission to reprint previously published materials is the responsibility of the author. Authors have the responsibility to verify that they have read all the materials cited in their manuscript and, if necessary, have contacted the relevant authors to verify the accuracy of cited material. Manuscripts are subject to copy editing. The author will receive proofs via email for review prior to publication. Acceptance rate and time to publication – The final acceptance rate is approximately 80% and time from submission to publication is currently about 18 months. Specific types of articles sought – The journal accepts original articles: case studies, letters, descriptions of clinical care, and research. Query letters are welcome, but not required. Material must be original and never published before. Material is submitted for review with the understanding that it is not being submitted to any other journal simultaneously. Noteworthy – MEDSURG Nursing presents annual Writer's Awards to novice and experienced authors for excellence in medical-surgical nursing clinical scholarship at the annual Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses convention. In your opinion, what distinguishes the most read or cited articles in your journal over the past few years? The most frequently read articles in this journal are those with direct clinical application. The majority of the journal's readers are bedside care providers who are very interested in evidence-based strategies to improve their clinical practice. In your experience as an editor, what are the top three reasons you reject articles? I reject manuscripts for poor writing. While I am very willing to mentor authors to improve their writing, I may encourage someone who appears to have poor writing skills to seek a local mentor for assistance with a manuscript revision. Some authors also opt for a chatty rather than a scholarly approach to their topics. I also reject manuscripts that rely on older sources or lack nursing references. Finally, I reject manuscripts that do not show awareness of the journal's guidelines for publication; for example, authors may fail to follow APA citation requirements or the journal's standard format for reporting research results. Dottie Roberts, MSN, MACI, RN, CMSRN, OCNS-C Editor, MEDSURG Nursing, dmroberts@southuniversity.edu

Editorial

<i>ChemSystemsChem</i> – On the Up and Up

We address the growing concern of requests for post-submission and post-acceptance changes in authorship which our editorial team has observed in recent years. We emphasise that authorship order should be agreed upon by all contributors before submission, as all authors are expected to approve the final version of their manuscript and agree on their respective authorship positions. This editorial identifies seven categories of authorship change requests, ranging from adding or removing ordinary authors to modifying first or last authorship positions, or introducing group authorship. We consider some of these requests legitimate, such as adding author(s) who performed additional analyses based on reviewers' feedback or removing author(s) disagreeing with such revisions. We consider some others indicative of potentially concerning practices, particularly those involving changes to first or last authorship positions. We place this trend within a broader context of questionable research practices, including 'honorary' or 'gift' authorships driven by institutional power dynamics and the more recent emergence of 'paper mills'. These practices seem to be increasing in frequency with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and large publicly available data sets, which have lowered the barriers to producing large volumes of research of questionable value. Existing safeguards developed by organisations such as the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) are helpful, but limited in their ability to prevent such practices. To address these challenges, the Journal of Global Health introduces the GUidelines for Authors on Requesting and DIsclosing changes in Authorship Nominations (GUARDIAN), which mandate full transparency whenever authorship changes occur after submission. Specifically, in the part of the standard 'acknowledgements' section at the end of each paper, where the mandatory 'authorship contributions' statement is typically detailed, the authors will be required to: (i) declare that the authorship byline has been changed since submission; (ii) disclose precisely what changes to the byline occurred between these two versions; (iii) provide an explanation for this change; and (iv) provide the final authorship contributions accordingly. Supporting documentation will also be archived by our editors and may be shared upon legitimate requests. The GUARDIAN aim to deter misconduct through transparency, protect early-career researchers from authorship pressure, and improve accountability in academic publishing. Together with our previously introduced Guidelines for Reporting Analyses of Big Data Repositories Open to the Public (GRABDROP) and other integrity initiatives, the GUARDIAN represent a proactive effort to safeguard credibility of authorships, while allowing legitimate adjustments whenever they are properly justified.

Women Authorship in Cardiovascular Science: A Call to Track and Report to Achieve Equity.

Byline: T. Sathyanarayana Rao, L. Sam. Manickam, Roy. Kallivayalil Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible - Frank Gomes. The Beginning When we envisaged this project 2 years ago, we were clear as to what we intended to do. However, as we moved along we realized its complexities as aired by some of the eminent members of the psychiatry community. Though there were differences of opinion among the editorial team, we felt that we have to make a beginning. Over the years of practice of psychiatry in India, we realized that in order to provide effective care of the persons and families with mental disorders, we need to be innovative and inclusive of the diverse cultural setting which we hail from. Therefore, the real art of psychiatry depends on how well one integrates the diversity in one's practice. When we announced this initiative, several eyebrows were raised as to where we are heading to. Though we are not completely content with what we have achieved, but we could see the end of the tunnel after 2 years of incubation. We are hoping that there will be more psychiatrists who would dare to tread the path that we are laying, though it is not easy. The Impetus The models that we have are the steps taken by some of the pioneers in psychiatry who made solo ventures during their times and dared to move forward from the scientific tradition in which we are trained. Concepts that were considered alien to medicine and psychiatry were keenly searched and brought under the fabric of science. One of the treatises that was left unnoticed is ' The Yoga Sutras ' written by Girindrasekhar Bose. [sup][1] Efforts by Vahia, [sup][2] on bringing in Yogic concepts into the main stream has helped develop the branch of Yoga into a wider perspective and now a separate journal of Yoga is being published from India. Guru-Chela relationship that was proposed by Neki [sup][2] made researchers re-look at the doctor-patient and teacher-student relationship in the Asian cultural context. [sup][3] The concept of mind that is referred to in different Indian philosophical schools of thought intrigues many. [sup][4],[5],[6] The Current Effort From the time we launched this project two years ago, we have received numerous articles and many have shown interest to write. Out of the articles that we received, the editorial team has accepted almost half of the submitted articles for publication in this current volume. This decision was based on the pattern and flow of the content, relevance, completeness, and congruity with the basic Indian mental concepts as envisaged for this project. The very important determinant was its application to behavioral sciences, in general and psychiatric practice, in particular. Above all, space constraint had a significant role in the final outcome.. We would like to interact with those authors in future and provide mentorship to the young researchers as well. Some of the authors have considered Indian thoughts, without referring to the Indian treatise but have solely relied on authors from abroad that were available in Google search. However, there are several researchers in India, who have worked on different concepts but those may be in the libraries of different institutions in India or published in journals that are not yet accessible through the net search. Till Indian of Psychiatry was available online and was indexed in PubMed, a lot of Indian research in psychiatry also went unnoticed by the International Community of Psychiatrists. Therefore, we urge those who are interested in the Indian mental concepts to unearth the unpublished doctoral and master level thesis as well as those articles that are published in several Indian journals, including the Journal of Indian Psychology and to scan through the comprehensive list of articles that are available in the ICSSR publication. [sup][7] Some Thoughts The current issue is being brought out as a first volume/supplementary and we look forward to your valuable suggestions, creative and critical comments, and feedback on this initiative, which would help us to develop a guideline for the new authors to explore the Indian mental concepts. …

BackgroundLarge language models (LLMs), the most recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), have profoundly affected academic publishing and raised important ethical and practical concerns. This study examined the prevalence and content of AI guidelines in Korean medical journals to assess the current landscape and inform future policy implementation.MethodsThe top 100 Korean medical journals determined by Hirsh index were surveyed. Author guidelines were collected and screened by a human researcher and AI chatbot to identify AI-related content. The key components of LLM policies were extracted and compared across journals. The journal characteristics associated with the adoption of AI guidelines were also analyzed.ResultsOnly 18% of the surveyed journals had LLM guidelines, which is much lower than previously reported in international journals. However, the adoption rates increased over time, reaching 57.1% in the first quarter of 2024. High-impact journals were more likely to have AI guidelines. All journals with LLM guidelines required authors to declare LLM tool use and 94.4% prohibited AI authorship. The key policy components included emphasizing human responsibility (72.2%), discouraging AI-generated content (44.4%), and exempting basic AI tools (38.9%).ConclusionWhile the adoption of LLM guidelines among Korean medical journals is lower than the global trend, there has been a clear increase in implementation over time. The key components of these guidelines align with international standards, but greater standardization and collaboration are needed to ensure the responsible and ethical use of LLMs in medical research and writing.

Cómo escribir un artículo original