It launched in February 20, 2014 with volume 1 and number 1. It is to be published biannually. Supplement issues may be published. Total or a part of the articles in this journal are abstracted in ScienceCentral, Directory of Open Access Journal, Google Scholar, and CrossRef. Circulation number of print copies is 500 per issue. Full text is freely available from: http://www.escienceediting.org or http://e-se.org. It is the member journal of Council of Science Editors, the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, and European Association of Science Editors. There is no page charge or article processing charge of author side. This journal is supported by the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies, the Government of the Republic of Korea (2013-2014).

This case study investigated changes in research articles from the Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology (KRIBB) during the COVID-19 pandemic to share information with stakeholders in the research and publishing communities. Data on research published from 2017 to 2024 were collected by searching the database for the number of research articles indexed in Web of Science’s Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and then extracting the publication date of research articles from the KRIBB’s paper management system. After the number of WoS-SCIE research articles was scaled down by the corresponding number of KRIBB’s SCIE articles in 2017, we analyzed differences in the publication turnaround times of KRIBB’s research articles based on whether MDPI was involved. In both WoS-SCIE and KRIBB data, the impact of MDPI exhibited a clear decline in 2023, a trend that continued into 2024. Generally, KRIBB’s non-MDPI research articles were published more rapidly in high-frequency journals, journals with low impact factors, and for COVID-19–related topics; however, this difference gradually diminished. In 2023, there was a notable reversal from a decrease to an increase in publication speed following COVID-19, along with a narrowing of the gaps between different stages of publication. It remains uncertain whether this trend will continue. Collecting additional similar case studies could provide a more accurate understanding of the changes and trends in the article publishing industry during the COVID-19 period.

Purpose: Scientific journals play a pivotal role in disseminating research findings, validating methodologies, and promoting academic discourse. In the past decade, technological advancements, global collaborations, and evolving editorial policies have driven significant transformations in journal management. This systematic literature review investigated the key trends, challenges, and opportunities in scientific journal management between 2013 and 2023.Methods: Utilizing a PRISMA-guided methodology, 26 peer-reviewed articles from the Scopus database were analyzed.Results: The findings reveal five primary themes: (1) journal management systems and technological improvements; (2) editorial processes, policies, and best practices; (3) metrics, evaluation, and scientometrics; (4) case studies and implementation; and (5) ethical, social, and equity considerations. Technological innovations, such as artificial intelligence–driven tools, improved plagiarism detection systems, and semantic workflows, have improved operational efficiency. Editorial best practices and evaluation metrics have evolved to promote transparency, accountability, and research integrity. However, persistent challenges include financial sustainability, disparities in gender representation, and maintaining consistency in editorial quality.Conclusion: This review underscores the importance of adaptive strategies and innovative frameworks in ensuring the long-term sustainability, accessibility, and impact of scholarly journals in a rapidly evolving academic publishing landscape.

It launched in February 20, 2014 with volume 1 and number 1. It is to be published biannually. Supplement issues may be published. Total or a part of the articles in this journal are abstracted in ScienceCentral, Directory of Open Access Journal, Google Scholar, and CrossRef. Circulation number of print copies is 500 per issue. Full text is freely available from: http://www.escienceediting.org or http://e-se.org. It is the member journal of Council of Science Editors, the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, and European Association of Science Editors. There is no page charge or article processing charge of author side. This journal is supported by the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies, the Government of the Republic of Korea (2013-2014).

Purpose: The peer review process is essential for maintaining the quality of scientific publications. However, identifying reviewers who possess the necessary expertise can be challenging. In Open Journal Systems (OJS), which is commonly utilized by journals, the most effective method of inviting reviewers is when they are already registered in the system. This study seeks to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the reviewer selection process to ensure high-quality peer reviews.Methods: We introduced a process innovation to analyze users within OJS and obtain recommendations for potential reviewers possessing the relevant expertise for the manuscript under review. This study collected user data from OJS as potential reviewers and utilized information from the Scopus search application programming interface (API). We extracted authors’ data from the Scopus API to obtain their Scopus IDs, which were then used to scrape publication data of potential reviewers. The system matched the previous works of reviewers with the title and abstract of the manuscript using term frequency-inverse document frequency and cosine similarity algorithms.Results: The system was evaluated by comparing its recommendations with the assessments made by the editorial team. This evaluation yielded precision, mean average precision, and mean reciprocal rank values of 0.47, 0.77, and 0.87, respectively.Conclusion: The results clearly demonstrate the system’s ability to provide relevant reviewer recommendations. This system offers significant benefits by assisting editors in identifying suitable reviewer candidates from the existing user database in OJS, particularly for the evaluation of manuscripts.

Purpose: This analysis aims to propose guidelines for artificial intelligence (AI) research ethics in scientific publications, intending to inform publishers and academic institutional policies in order to guide them toward a coherent and consistent approach to AI research ethics.Methods: A literature-based thematic analysis was conducted. The study reviewed the publication policies of the top 10 journal publishers addressing the use of AI in scholarly publications as of October 2024. Thematic analysis using Atlas.ti identified themes and subthemes across the documents, which were consolidated into proposed research ethics guidelines for using generative AI and AI-assisted tools in scholarly publications.Results: The analysis revealed inconsistencies among publishers’ policies on AI use in research and publications. AI-assisted tools for grammar and formatting are generally accepted, but positions vary regarding generative AI tools used in pre-writing and research methods. Key themes identified include author accountability, human oversight, recognized and unrecognized uses of AI tools, and the necessity for transparency in disclosing AI usage. All publishers agree that AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Concerns involve biases, quality and reliability issues, compliance with intellectual property rights, and limitations of AI detection tools.Conclusion: The article highlights the significant knowledge gap and inconsistencies in guidelines for AI use in scientific research. There is an urgent need for unified ethical standards, and guidelines are proposed for distinguishing between the accepted use of AI-assisted tools and the cautious use of generative AI tools.

While generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology has become increasingly competitive since OpenAI introduced ChatGPT, its widespread use poses significant ethical challenges in research. Excessive reliance on tools like ChatGPT may intensify ethical concerns in scholarly articles. Therefore, this article aims to provide a comprehensive narrative review of the ethical issues associated with using AI in academic writing and to inform researchers of current trends. Our methodology involved a detailed examination of literature on ChatGPT and related research trends. We conducted searches in major databases to identify additional relevant articles and cited literature, from which we collected and analyzed papers. We identified major issues from the literature, categorized into problems faced by authors using nonacademic AI platforms in writing and challenges related to the detection and acceptance of AI-generated content by reviewers and editors. We explored eight specific ethical problems highlighted by authors and reviewers and conducted a thorough review of five key topics in research ethics. Given that nonacademic AI platforms like ChatGPT often do not disclose their training data sources, there is a substantial risk of unattributed content and plagiarism. Therefore, researchers must verify the accuracy and authenticity of AI-generated content before incorporating it into their article, ensuring adherence to principles of research integrity and ethics, including avoidance of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism.

It launched in February 20, 2014 with volume 1 and number 1. It is to be published biannually. Supplement issues may be published. Total or a part of the articles in this journal are abstracted in ScienceCentral, Directory of Open Access Journal, Google Scholar, and CrossRef. Circulation number of print copies is 500 per issue. Full text is freely available from: http://www.escienceediting.org or http://e-se.org. It is the member journal of Council of Science Editors, the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, and European Association of Science Editors. There is no page charge or article processing charge of author side. This journal is supported by the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies, the Government of the Republic of Korea (2013-2014).

Purpose: The evolving landscape of nursing research emphasizes inclusive representation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has established guidelines to ensure the fair representation of various demographic variables, including age, sex, and ethnicity. This study aimed to evaluate the adherence of nursing journals indexed in MEDLINE or PubMed Central to the ICMJE’s directives on gender equity, given that journals indexed in MEDLINE and PubMed Central typically adhere to the ICMJE’s guidelines.Methods: A descriptive literature review methodology was employed to analyze 160 nursing journals listed in two databases as of July 28, 2023. The website of each journal was searched, and the most recent original article from each was selected. These articles were then evaluated for their alignment with the ICMJE guidelines on gender equity. Descriptive statistics were applied to categorize and enumerate the cases.Results: Of the articles reviewed from 160 journals, 115 dealt with human populations. Of these, 93 required a description of gender equity. Within this subset, 83 articles distinguished between the genders of human subjects. Gender-based interpretations were provided in 15 articles, while another 68 did not offer an interpretation of differences by gender. Among the 10 articles that did not delineate gender, only two provided a rationale for this omission.Conclusion: Among recent articles published in the nursing journals indexed in MEDLINE and PubMed Central, only 16.1% presented clear gender analyses. These findings highlight the need for editors to strengthen their dedication to gender equity within their editorial policies.

It launched in February 20, 2014 with volume 1 and number 1. It is to be published biannually. Supplement issues may be published. Total or a part of the articles in this journal are abstracted in ScienceCentral, Directory of Open Access Journal, Google Scholar, and CrossRef. Circulation number of print copies is 500 per issue. Full text is freely available from: http://www.escienceediting.org or http://e-se.org. It is the member journal of Council of Science Editors, the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, and European Association of Science Editors. There is no page charge or article processing charge of author side. This journal is supported by the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies, the Government of the Republic of Korea (2013-2014).