Editorial

Introducing Article Numbering to Modern Pathology

The International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (IJSEM) will move to 'true continuous publication' during the first months of 2021 to modernize the workflow and align it with the current online-only nature of the journal. In the new format, articles will be cited using an article number rather than page numbering. The article number will be the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) suffix, i.e., the last six digits of the DOI. Benefits of the new system include streamlining in-house processes, hence, reducing time and costs, and speeding up the publication time of the final 'Version of Record'. Because of the new format of the IJSEM, it is necessary to emend Rule 24b (2) and Note 1 paragraph 3 of Rule 27 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) to regulate matters of priority for papers published after January 2021. We also propose adding another example to Note 2 of Rule 33b to clarify how nomenclatural authorities of names published in the IJSEM from 2021 onward must be cited.

Análisis de la producción científica de A ctividad D ietética (1997-2007): ¿qué ha sido, qué es y qué se espera que sea la revista científica de la AED-N?

Background. Scientometrics has a significant impact on research policies, allocation of research budgets, equipping research centers, and setting research priorities. In the present study, pharmaceutical studies published by Iranian authors were studied based on scientometric parameters during the last decade (2013-2022). Methods. Total number of the indexed articles, the number of citations, top articles in terms of citation rate, organizational affiliation, international collaboration, type of document, the number of retracted papers, titles of the journals publishing the articles, and the number of open access papers were collected from the Scopus database. Results. The results showed that in the past years, the number of articles by Iranian pharmaceutical researchers was higher compared to the researchers of developed countries such as Japan and Switzerland, but the number of citations was lower. Review articles dealing with general topics that are among the trends in the pharmaceutical sciences globally have been cited more frequently. Type I universities have published the highest number of articles in the field of pharmaceutical sciences, and Tehran, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, and Tabriz University of Medical Sciences were at the top of the list. Iranian researchers had the highest number of international collaborations with the USA and UK research groups. Moreover, most of the published Iranian articles were original and review articles, but the number of indexed books or book chapters in Scopus was the lowest Conclusion. The researchers of pharmaceutical sciences in Iran had a good growth in terms of scientometric indicators and international collaboration, and review articles were very important in improving the scientometric indicators. Based on findings, it is necessary for the research policy makers and granting bodies to support more qualified research projects, observe ethics in research, and encourage the publication of authentic scientific books or book chapters. Practical Implications. Retrospective scientometric study of the subject areas is one of the most practical methods for measuring the achievement of research goals set in the subject area. This method can identify the strengths and weaknesses of the research area and enable national policy-making to make the research area more efficient.

Background and Objectives: Academic websites by introducing history, goals, educational, research, administrative and extracurricular services, and the recruitment of students, faculty and staff, play an important role in the dissemination of educational, research and administrative information of universities. The web is a vast collection of heterogeneous information that are interconnected through links. the information on the web is not organized properly, and this heterogeneous nature of information imposed disordered conditions on the web. However, the organization may provide a large amount of information on its website, but if retrieval of it is difficult, its usefulness will be reduced. Furthermore, a website may have a high level of interaction, but if users can not have access to it, this level of interaction will not be significant. This indicates a key problem in that website’s visibility and accessibility. Visibility is a very important metric in Webometrics studies, so that the usefulness of the inventories depends on how its content is visible, and the numbers in the inventory is a good indicator for measuring visibility. The visibility of a site also affects its coverage and retrieval by search engines. Accordingly, visibility and clarity are related to enabling interconnections in a space that todays have found a great importance. The topic of web visibility and its important role in different rankings of universities and higher education institutions has been the subject of several models in this field. With regard to the comprehensiveness of the Fishkin & Pollard’s (2007) industry model, this study intends to examine the characteristics of the top 100 web sites in webometric ranking system. So the main question is, what is the status of the site size, the rich files, and the number of articles, the site links, and the visibility of the top 100 Web sites in Webometric ranking system? And is the size of the website, the number of information rich files, the number of articles retrieved from Google Scholar and Web Links affect their visibility? Methodology: : The present study is an applied research in terms of its objective, and since it seeks to describe the status of the university's superior university webometric system in terms of visibility characteristics, it has been conducted as an analytical survey. Data collection was done by library and field methods in the first six months of year 2017. For this data collection, the checklists according to Fishkin and Pollard’s (2007) model, containing 30 items for the four subsets of visibility, size of website (including the number of web pages, website size in megabytes, and page rank), rich information files (including PDF, DOC, PPT, PS and RTF) and the number of articles retrieved through Google Scholar, was used. The validity of the instrument was formally determined and its reliability was calculated by using the retest method, and the correlation of the results was obtained (r = 0.89), which it confirms the reliability of the instrument and then various instruments were used to evaluate each of them. Data analysis was done using the SPSS 21software. Findings: The results showed that 14 features of the industry model were observed in 100% of the websites. The size of the website is more than 89% between 0.59to 7.39 MB. The results of the hypothesis test showed that the size and volume of the site (r = 0.637) at the significance level (Sig. 0.002), the number of enriched files (r = 0.546) at the significance level (Sig. 0.001), receiving referral links (r = 0. 674) at the significant level (Sig. 0.000), and the number of articles retrieved from Google Scholar (r = 0.654) at the significance level (Sig. 0.001) has a direct impact on visibility. In addition, the intensity of the relationship is stronger for the variable of referred links compared to the other three variables. Discussion: The visibility of a website is an important and essential component because it represents accessibility and find ability of a web site by the various search engines in the heterogeneous web environment. The effect of different components on visibility can be investigated from various aspects. For example, receiving referred links on the one hand points to sharing of a website content with other websites, which itself can be the reason for the validity of information content of a site; on the other hand, the visibility of a website and the ability to retrieve it by search engines refers indirectly to links from other sites. The multiplicity of links within the website and from the subpages and subset of a website can also indicate the distribution of the information content of the website on its various pages. This also refers to the architecture of the website and is associated to the size of the website and the number of pages. Therefore, identifying different factors requires further studies in the future.

Limnology and Oceanography: Methods made great strides in its first year of publishing with our partners at Wiley. The number of articles and pages published both increased in 2015. We have been working hard to improve our manuscript handling, particularly the time to a first decision and total time to publication. The time to first decision decreased by 23 d, and the total time to publication by a full 53 d! We have not sacrificed the journal's high standards, however. The journal's impact continues to increase, with substantial gains in H-index and rank compared to other limnology and oceanography journals. L&O:Methods continues to evolve with the development of new subject areas. We actively encourage submissions in emerging fields, and endeavor to maintain the ability to handle manuscripts covering new and traditional topics. Much of the credit for a successful journal goes to the Associate Editors, whose detailed knowledge of their fields of expertise is critically important to obtaining fair and helpful reviews. Unfortunately, we can't hold on to Associate Editors forever! In the past year, several Associate Editors have resigned to take up new opportunities. I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the dedicated, hard work of former Associate Editors Elizabeth Minor, Karen Casciotti, Todd Kana, and Claudia Benitez-Nelson, all of whom wrapped up their last manuscripts in 2015 or are finishing them up right now. Dr. Gordon Holtgrieve University of Washington Dr. Tammi Richardson University of South Carolina Dr. Malinda Sutor Louisiana State University Dr. Krista Longnecker Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Dr. Xiao Hua Wang University New South Wales Dr. David Suggett University of Technology, Sydney Dr. Craig Lee University of Washington Dr. Lee is a physical oceanographer specializing in observations and instrument development. His primary scientific interests include: upper ocean dynamics, especially mesoscale and submesocale fronts and eddies; interactions between biology, biogeochemistry and ocean physics; and high-latitude oceanography. An important component of this work involves identifying advances that could be achieved through novel measurements and developing new instruments to meet these needs. Paul Kemp, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu HI 96822; lomethods-editor@aslo.org

Bridging the Segment-Prosody Divide in Speech Production and Perception

Beginning with this issue of Reproductive Medicine and Biology (RMB), we have a new publisher, Springer Japan. Subscribers will also find that the journal has an attractive new cover design. In keeping with our tradition, however, we will continue to be active in publishing original and informative research articles that provide new insights in the fields of reproductive medicine and reproductive biology. Articles reporting results of clinical trials as well as case reports will also be included in order to accelerate the development of clinical medicine. As part of our new partnership with Springer, we will introduce a fully electronic manuscript submission and processing system, facilitating manuscript submission, review, and tracking. Authors can view the status of their manuscripts online at any time and can both read and respond to reviewers’ comments; they also have the convenience of submitting revisions online. This system substantially shortens the time from submission to acceptance, so that articles can be published that much more quickly in the RMB. Another major change for RMB is the introduction of Online First, which makes it possible to publish accepted articles in electronic form prior to the appearance of the printed journal, without having to wait for the completion of an entire issue, printed or electronic. This makes possible another significant reduction in publication time. As each article becomes ready for Online First publication, it will be published on the Web with its own publication date. Each article will receive a permanent, unique international identification code, the digital object identifier (DOI), which is registered with the International DOI Foundation (http://www.doi.org). Contributions published Online First but not yet available in print may be cited by journal title and DOI only. The print version also includes the DOI and date of online publication. With these concerted efforts, we are eagerly anticipating acceptance in the Medline/PubMed Index and the Science Citation Index, which will make it possible for us to be assigned an impact factor. Springer's global team will be assisting us in applying for these listings by using their international experience and information resources as they have successfully assisted many Japanese scientific journals to achieve the desired results in acceptance by these indexes. I sincerely hope that as we begin our association with Springer, many excellent manuscripts from countries around the world will be submitted to RMB. Hiroshi Imai, Editor-in-Chief

Two [1, 2] articles in volume 139 of the Swiss Journal of Palaeontology published with an incorrect article number, this error was caused by a technical problem during publication. This correction article is to publish the incorrect and correct article numbers.

There were 83 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2011, which is an 11% increase in the number of articles since 2010. The quality of the submissions continues to increase. The editors had been delighted with the 2010 JCMR Impact Factor of 4.33, although this fell modestly to 3.72 for 2011. The impact factor undergoes natural variation according to citation rates of papers in the 2 years following publication, and is significantly influenced by highly cited papers such as official reports. However, we remain very pleased with the progress of the journal's impact over the last 5 years. Our acceptance rate is approximately 25%, and has been falling as the number of articles being submitted has been increasing. In accordance with Open-Access publishing, the JCMR articles go on-line as they are accepted with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, the Editors feel it is useful to summarize the papers for the readership into broad areas of interest or theme, which we feel would be useful, so that areas of interest from the previous year can be reviewed in a single article in relation to each other and other recent JCMR articles [1]. The papers are presented in broad themes and set in context with related literature and previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought in the journal. We hope that you find the open-access system increases wider reading and citation of your papers, and that you will continue to send your quality manuscripts to JCMR for publication.

Do you care about if and how you and your colleagues’ research articles are cited by other researchers? Which articles published in this journal are the most cited? Is it possible to calculate the impact factor of a journal by yourself? I often go to Google Scholar to check out the citations of articles. And being new as editor I wanted to study how the articles in our journal are being cited. Google Scholar has the advantage of being free to use as compared with Web of Science owned by Thomson (who publish the Thomson Reuters Impact Factor), and Scopus, owned by Elsevier. Subscription fees for Web of Science are secret, but considered to be higher than Scopus fees which in 2005 were $US20 000–120 000 per year depending on institution size [1]. Google Scholar has increased its capacities and features in recent years and is now updated twice a week. Google Scholar used to yield fewer articles published before 1996, while today it readily retrieves earlier research. Bibliometric research comparing Google Scholar with Web of Science and Scopus shows differences but the correlation is high [2–5]. In addition to Thomson journal articles, Google Scholar searches show science reports, dissertations, books, and articles from journals not indexed by Thomson. Lacking access to Web of Science or Scopus, I used Google Scholar to track citations for all 111 original publications in the Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care (SJPHC) in 2008–2010. The median number of Thomson journal citations according to a manual Google Scholar search for the 111 articles was two. I then calculated a 2010 impact factor by summing all Thomson journal citations published in 2010 that I found in Google Scholar for articles published in the SJPHC in 2008 and 2009. The sum of 144 citations was then divided by 77, which is the number of original articles published in the SJPHC during 2008 and 2009. My own 2010 impact factor calculation for SJPHC was 1.87. The 2010 impact factor delivered by Thomson is 1.909. This means that Google Scholar search missed three citations, i.e. 2% of those that make up the impact factor. In Table I the titles of the most cited articles in each of the 12 issues published in the SJPHC 2008–2010 are presented plus the cumulated number of citations they have received both Google Scholar and Thomson journal citations; the number of cumulated citations from the SJPHC, 18% of all Thomson citations, as well as the share of Thomson journal citations that make up the 2010 impact factor. Obviously, articles published in 2008 and 2009 have been cited more than the 2010 articles. And, evidently, the most cited articles in 2008 contribute twice as much (17%) to the 2010 impact factor as do the most cited in 2009 (9%). This is because they have on average twice as much time available to be cited for the impact factor algorithm. Table I. Original articles published in the Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care (SJPHC) with the highest number of citations per issue in 2008–2010.1 Looking at the article titles shows that the journal publishes a wide variety of research subjects, which goes with our diverse area of medicine. I wanted to study whether any substantive fields of research were more cited than others. Therefore, I further analysed the article titles and tested a possible correlation between article title content and number of citations. No significant correlations between article title content and number of Thomson citations were found after repeated non-parametric tests using different title content categorizations. Many have criticized the impact factor for various reasons [6]. Nevertheless, the success of research and its implementation requires articles to be read, spread, and cited. And one easy way to measure research impact is counting citations.

Generalized Nets (GNs) are abstract mathematical objects designed for modelling, simulation, optimization, and control of real processes. Essentially, they represent a superstructure of Petri Nets, used for modelling various processes in industry, science, medicine, and many other fields. The topic of this research is the potential application of generalized nets in the development of models for specific educational processes and systems that support these processes. The methodological framework for this research is based on the general method of qualitative analysis and recommendations for research with a literature review. The adopted work method involves searching relevant scientific databases in the field of applying generalized networks in modelling systems and processes in education. The key questions in this research relate to: determining the general themes in the found publications concerning generalized networks and education, as well as identifying how many and which of the found network models belong to which thematic areas; what types and characteristics of generalized nets are applied in these models, and what are the basic characteristics of the models themselves (the number of transitions and the number of places that make up the static structure of the model). The research results show that out of a total of 150 found papers in the WoS, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar databases, 36 met the inclusion criteria, and these papers were categorized and analysed in detail in the discussion. The research concludes that the application of generalized nets in education is significantly represented in scientific publications, and the application is mostly related to processes and systems associated with higher education, which can be explained by the positions and experiences of the authors of the papers, who are university lecturers.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly reshaping educational systems worldwide, influencing pedagogy, assessment, governance, and learner engagement. While the volume of AI-in-education research has expanded rapidly, particularly following the emergence of generative AI, there remains a need for up-to-date synthesis focused on the most recent phase of adoption. This study presents a systematic review of peer-reviewed research on AI in education published between 2024 and 2025, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search of Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and the ACM Digital Library yielded 37 eligible studies. Using a narrative synthesis approach, the review examines publication trends, research methods, thematic focus areas, and educational contexts. The findings reveal a field dominated by meta-research, including bibliometric analyses, conceptual papers, and systematic reviews, with limited primary empirical evidence assessing real world educational outcomes. Major thematic areas include personalized and self-regulated learning, generative AI and assessment, AI literacy, ethical and equity concerns, and institutional governance. Higher education and professional training contexts are disproportionately represented, while school-level education receives comparatively limited attention. The review highlights a growing research–practice gap, as technological adoption outpaces empirical validation and policy development. Overall, the study provides a timely synthesis of contemporary AI-in-education research, identifying critical evidence gaps and governance challenges. It underscores the need for empirically grounded, ethically informed, and context-sensitive approaches to AI integration that move beyond conceptual promise toward sustainable and equitable educational practice.

Interactive systems are being developed with the intention to help in the engagement of patients on various therapies. Amid the recent technological advances, Kinect™ from Microsoft (Redmond, WA) has helped pave the way on how user interaction technology facilitates and complements many clinical applications. In order to examine the actual status of Kinect developments for rehabilitation, this article presents a systematic review of articles that involve interactive, evaluative, and technical advances related to motor rehabilitation. Systematic research was performed in the IEEE Xplore and PubMed databases using the key word combination "Kinect AND rehabilitation" with the following inclusion criteria: (1) English language, (2) page number >4, (3) Kinect system for assistive interaction or clinical evaluation, or (4) Kinect system for improvement or evaluation of the sensor tracking or movement recognition. Quality assessment was performed by QualSyst standards. In total, 109 articles were found in the database research, from which 31 were included in the review: 13 were focused on the development of assistive systems for rehabilitation, 3 in evaluation, 3 in the applicability category, 7 on validation of Kinect anatomic and clinical evaluation, and 5 on improvement techniques. Quality analysis of all included articles is also presented with their respective QualSyst checklist scores. Research and development possibilities and future works with the Kinect for rehabilitation application are extensive. Methodological improvements when performing studies on this area need to be further investigated.

Bibliometric analysis of the Spanish MR radiological production (2001–2007)