Publications

18 pages, 329 KB

Open AccessEssay

Reassessing the Role of Google Scholar in PRISMA-Informed Systematic Reviews Through a Critical Analysis of Influential Research Identifying Its Limitations and Empirical Evidence

by Carol Nash

Publications 2026, 14(2), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020029 - 4 May 2026

Abstract

There is contested use of Google Scholar as a primary database for PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reviews. However, well-cited articles identify Google Scholar as insufficiently reliable and evaluate its use as supplementary. Subsequent systematic review searches have accepted [...] Read more.

There is contested use of Google Scholar as a primary database for PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reviews. However, well-cited articles identify Google Scholar as insufficiently reliable and evaluate its use as supplementary. Subsequent systematic review searches have accepted this relegation of Google Scholar to supplementary status, citing these articles as the reason. This study questions this acceptance by (1) revealing the type of difficulties with Google Scholar identified in these well-cited publications compared with PRISMA guidelines, and (2) examining several PRISMA scoping review primary database searches performed by this author since 2023 for the adequacy of Google Scholar results compared with them. The results reveal that the reasons for considering Google Scholar a supplementary database regarding PRISMA status are not convincing, as they are unrelated to PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. Google Scholar returned the greatest number of included studies for the majority of post-2023 scoping reviews conducted by this author. These results demonstrate that the accepted advice to authors that Google Scholar should be a supplementary database is unsupported. Based on the results of this research, the suggestion is to accept Google Scholar as a primary database, comparable in all relevant ways to other primary databases for a PRISMA-style review. Full article

19 pages, 1536 KB

Open AccessArticle

Economic Journals of the BRICS Countries: Assessment of Academic Influence

by Irina D. Turgel and Olga A. Chernova

Publications 2026, 14(2), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020028 - 1 May 2026

Abstract

The BRICS countries are playing an increasingly significant role in shaping a multipolar model of global science. This study aims to assess the academic influence of economic journals published in BRICS countries from the following key perspectives: academic standing, relevance, influence sustainability, internationalization, [...] Read more.

The BRICS countries are playing an increasingly significant role in shaping a multipolar model of global science. This study aims to assess the academic influence of economic journals published in BRICS countries from the following key perspectives: academic standing, relevance, influence sustainability, internationalization, and external institutional recognition (lack of isolation). The methods of bibliometric, comparative, and cluster analysis were used. The study revealed that the BRICS countries have significantly increased their presence in the Scopus database. However, their scientific publishing landscape is highly heterogeneous. Russia and India exhibit the highest publication volumes among the BRICS countries, albeit with relatively low citation rates and a low level of internationalization. Meanwhile, Chinese, South African, and Indonesian journals have the highest citation rates and strongest integration into the global discourse. Cluster analysis identified five groups of journals with a range of academic influence levels, from peripheral contributors to international leaders. Additionally, country-specific features of their distribution were determined. The present research provides insights into the pivotal role of national journals in overcoming peripherality and strengthening the academic influence of nationwide science. The research methodology can be used to develop strategies that promote nations to become part of the global research community. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 3356 KB

Open AccessArticle

The Attention Mismatch: Mapping the Structural Academic Governance Deficit in the Age of Generative AI

by Zhenning Guo, Haoran Mao and Fang Zhang

Publications 2026, 14(2), 27; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020027 - 17 Apr 2026

Abstract

With the rapid advancement in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), AI-generated content (AIGC) lacking human cognitive oversight is increasingly permeating open web environments and academic communication systems. This study integrates longitudinal retraction data (Retraction Watch Database, 1990–2026), web-scale analyses of AI-content penetration (Common Crawl, [...] Read more.

With the rapid advancement in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), AI-generated content (AIGC) lacking human cognitive oversight is increasingly permeating open web environments and academic communication systems. This study integrates longitudinal retraction data (Retraction Watch Database, 1990–2026), web-scale analyses of AI-content penetration (Common Crawl, 2013–2026), and bibliometric mapping of governance scholarship (Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Google Scholar, 2020–2026) to diagnose the cross-level misalignment between synthetic-content diffusion, AI-related misconduct pressure, and governance attention. On this basis, it proposes a Normalized Coverage Index (NCI) to measure the relative relationship between scholarly attention to AI-related academic misconduct governance and the level of misconduct pressure observed through retraction data across disciplines. The results reveal pronounced asymmetries at the disciplinary level. Fields such as chemistry (0.04), physics, mathematics & statistics (0.11), and life sciences & biology (0.34) exhibit clear governance gaps, whereas Education shows a comparatively excessive level of attention (NCI = 29.26). Since 2022, AIGC has expanded rapidly across open web corpora, accompanied by a sharp rise in AI-related retractions, which also exhibit a longer detection lag than traditional forms of misconduct (2.77 years vs. 1.91 years). Although the volume of academic governance-related research has grown rapidly, its proportion within the broader body of AI-related research has declined, suggesting that scholarly attention to governance has not kept pace with technological diffusion. Consequently, a structural misalignment in governance—closely tied to the allocation of attention—has emerged within the academic system in the era of GenAI. This misalignment may pose potential risks to the robustness of the knowledge production system. Addressing it requires rebuilding epistemic infrastructure through provenance transparency, auditable workflows, and governance-aware seed corpora aligned with empirically concentrated risks. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Large Language Models Across the Lifecycle of Scholarly Publishing)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 899 KB

Open AccessReview

An Integrated Framework for Publishable Sport Science Research

by Spyridon Plakias

Publications 2026, 14(2), 26; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020026 - 16 Apr 2026

Abstract

The rapid growth of scientific publications in sport science has intensified competition for publication and increased the importance of methodological rigor, transparent reporting, and effective scientific communication. Despite the availability of general guidance on scientific writing, recommendations specifically tailored to the context of [...] Read more.

The rapid growth of scientific publications in sport science has intensified competition for publication and increased the importance of methodological rigor, transparent reporting, and effective scientific communication. Despite the availability of general guidance on scientific writing, recommendations specifically tailored to the context of sport science publishing remain fragmented. The aim of this narrative review was to synthesize methodological, conceptual, and editorial perspectives in order to identify the key factors that influence the quality and publishability of sport science research. The review examines major dimensions of research quality, including theoretical grounding, methodological rigor, statistical inference, open science practices, and the structure of scientific manuscripts. In addition, common weaknesses that frequently lead to manuscript rejection, such as limited scientific contribution, methodological flaws, statistical misinterpretation, and inadequate scientific writing, are discussed. Building on this synthesis, the article proposes an integrated conceptual framework that conceptualizes publishable sport science research as a progressive process moving from conceptual foundations to methodological and analytical rigor, research transparency, and effective scientific communication. The framework, presented as a funnel, illustrates how these interconnected dimensions ultimately contribute to two complementary outcomes: the advancement of scientific knowledge and the practical application of research findings in sport contexts. By providing a structured overview of these elements, the proposed framework aims to support researchers in designing more rigorous studies, improving manuscript quality, and strengthening the impact of sport science research. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 447 KB

Open AccessSystematic Review

Evolving Roles of Information Professionals in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Systematic Literature Review

by Dyah Puspitasari Srirahayu, Dian Ekowati, Tiara Kusumaningtiyas, Esti Putri Anugrah, Alifian Sukma, Misita Anwar and Hanis Diyana Kamarudin

Publications 2026, 14(2), 25; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020025 - 16 Apr 2026

Abstract

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping the landscape of library and information science, significantly altering the roles and responsibilities of information professionals. This paper aims to examine the transformations of information professional roles in the era of artificial intelligence. This [...] Read more.

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping the landscape of library and information science, significantly altering the roles and responsibilities of information professionals. This paper aims to examine the transformations of information professional roles in the era of artificial intelligence. This study conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) emulating the PRISMA 2020 protocol. Titles and abstracts were screened based on predefined inclusion criteria, including English full-text journal articles, review papers, and conference papers indexed in Scopus addressing the roles and competencies of information professionals in the era of artificial intelligence. The study employed a conceptual and review analysis of documents to examine the use of AI and its impact on the roles of information professionals. We investigated the positive and negative effects of AI on the roles of information professionals, as well as the evolving role of information professionals in routine process automation. AI’s presence and transformation of virtually all the information professionals’ roles are profound, with pertinent challenges. The impact of AI on the roles of information professionals are both positive and negative, while the roles of information professionals have undergone significant changes in the AI era. This paper presents a unique perspective on the evolving roles of information professionals in the era of artificial intelligence. It offers original insights into how AI is reshaping the profession, highlighting the profound impacts and transformations that are redefining traditional practices and skill sets. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue AI in Open Access)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1374 KB

Open AccessArticle

The Coverage of Non-Traditional Research Outputs in Repositories and Current Research Information Systems: An Exploratory Study at the University of Bologna

by Alberto Ciarrocca, Ivan Heibi, Ahmadreza Nazari, Anna Nicoletti, Martina Pensalfini, Silvio Peroni, Lucrezia Pograri, Pietro Tisci and Sergei Slinkin

Publications 2026, 14(2), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020024 - 15 Apr 2026

Abstract

The diversification of research outcomes produced within scholarly communication practices has led to a growing production of non-traditional research outputs (NTROs) such as datasets, software, databases, exhibitions, and multimedia materials, which are often poorly tracked by institutional systems. This study presents an exploratory [...] Read more.

The diversification of research outcomes produced within scholarly communication practices has led to a growing production of non-traditional research outputs (NTROs) such as datasets, software, databases, exhibitions, and multimedia materials, which are often poorly tracked by institutional systems. This study presents an exploratory study about knowledge production at the University of Bologna (UNIBO). This prominent national research institution offers a compelling case study to assess coverage, cross-repository overlap, and citation activity of NTROs across repositories. By harvesting and integrating metadata from the University of Bologna’s institutional CRIS system, the institutional repository AMS Acta, the general-purpose repository Zenodo, the disciplinary archive Software Heritage, and OpenCitations to gather citation information, we analyse the availability of UNIBO-affiliated NTROs and show that, while the UNIBO CRIS platform (i.e., IRIS) remains the primary registry for information on NTROs, a substantial number of them are hosted exclusively in external repositories. These findings highlight structural gaps in tracking NTROs in UNIBO IRIS and underline the need for improved interoperability and coordinated Open Science strategies and policies, at least at the local level, to ensure recognition of diverse research outputs. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 1449 KB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

On the Vulnerability of Citation Metrics in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence

by Kay Smarsly

Publications 2026, 14(2), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020023 - 11 Apr 2026

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) chatbots, as a widely used form of generative artificial intelligence, have reduced the marginal cost of producing publication-style manuscripts and have expanded feasible routes for manipulating citation metrics within the publishing ecosystem. Citation-based indicators (e.g., the h-index, the i10-index, [...] Read more.

Large language model (LLM) chatbots, as a widely used form of generative artificial intelligence, have reduced the marginal cost of producing publication-style manuscripts and have expanded feasible routes for manipulating citation metrics within the publishing ecosystem. Citation-based indicators (e.g., the h-index, the i10-index, and total citation counts) remain embedded in research evaluation and are sensitive to indexing practices of bibliographic databases, with Google Scholar providing broad coverage combined with comparatively limited curation. In this study, a systematic literature review is conducted to synthesize reported mechanisms of citation-metric manipulation and to examine limitations of citation-metric use, including evidence reported in civil engineering. A Google Scholar proof-of-concept case study examines whether the indexing of LLM-assisted, non-peer-reviewed documents with concentrated references to a target author is associated with changes in author-level citation metrics under platform-specific conditions. After indexing, a stepwise increase in author-level metrics is observed, demonstrating the feasibility of citation-metric manipulation under the platform-specific conditions. Finally, this paper discusses the implications for research integrity and citation manipulation in the era of generative artificial intelligence. It also presents recommendations for researchers, academic institutions and evaluation committees, publishers and editors, bibliographic database providers, and funding institutions and policymakers. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue AI in Academic Metrics and Impact Analysis)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

28 pages, 3747 KB

Open AccessArticle

Quantitative Assessment of Scholarly Output and ROI in ARC-Funded Australian Research

by Karen Blackmore, Xin Gu and Shaleeza Sohail

Publications 2026, 14(2), 22; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020022 - 1 Apr 2026

Abstract

Government funding programs administered by the Australian Research Council (ARC) aim to advance national research priorities while generating scholarly and socio-economic impact. This study employs a descriptive bibliometric benchmarking approach to examine the relationship between funding levels and scholarly output for publications explicitly [...] Read more.

Government funding programs administered by the Australian Research Council (ARC) aim to advance national research priorities while generating scholarly and socio-economic impact. This study employs a descriptive bibliometric benchmarking approach to examine the relationship between funding levels and scholarly output for publications explicitly acknowledging ARC support. Using project-level funding data linked with journal articles published between 2009 and 2016, we analyze 10,565 ARC-funded projects receiving a total of AUD 4.6 billion and producing 54,639 journal publications. On average, each project received approximately AUD 437,720 and generated five publications, corresponding to a cost of about AUD 84,700 per article. We compare research productivity, citation impact, and return on investment across ARC Discovery and Linkage programs, as well as between STEM and HASS disciplines. The results reveal no strong correlation between funding amount and either publication volume or citation impact across ARC programs. STEM projects generally exhibit higher returns on investment and citation impact; however, a subset of HASS projects achieves exceptionally high efficiency relative to funding received. Notably, projects funded below AUD 100,000 demonstrate the highest return on investment in terms of both publication productivity and normalized citation impact. These findings suggest that smaller grants can yield disproportionately high scholarly returns, offering important implications for research funding allocation, efficiency evaluation, and performance assessment in public research systems. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

4 pages, 155 KB

Open AccessViewpoint

When AI Writes the Letters: Recognizing Synthetic Authorship Patterns in Medical Publishing

by Elise Lupon and Grégoire Micicoi

Publications 2026, 14(2), 21; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14020021 - 25 Mar 2026

Abstract

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence into scientific publishing is reshaping how academic text can be produced, revised, and scaled. While transparent and limited use of AI for language support may be acceptable, a new structural vulnerability may be emerging in medical [...] Read more.

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence into scientific publishing is reshaping how academic text can be produced, revised, and scaled. While transparent and limited use of AI for language support may be acceptable, a new structural vulnerability may be emerging in medical publishing: the large-scale production of short, plausible, and weakly individualized correspondence across multiple specialties. In this viewpoint, we describe and conceptualize a pattern that may be termed synthetic authorship, defined not as undisclosed AI use alone, but as a reproducible mode of scholarly output structurally facilitated by automation. We focus particularly on letters to the editor, a format that combines brevity, rapid editorial handling, and formal indexation, and may therefore be especially exposed to this phenomenon. Based on recurring patterns observed in PubMed-indexed literature, including unusually high publication velocity, abrupt thematic dispersion, and stylistic uniformity across unrelated domains, we argue that such outputs may challenge the authenticity, epistemic value, and editorial function of scientific correspondence. We do not present empirical proof of misconduct, but rather outline a conceptual framework for understanding this emerging risk and propose proportionate editorial safeguards, including cross-domain pattern detection and contextual assessment of authorship coherence. As AI lowers the threshold for generating domain-plausible commentary at scale, scientific publishing must adapt its integrity frameworks accordingly. In this context, vigilance toward synthetic authorship may become an essential component of editorial responsibility and post-publication quality control. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Large Language Models Across the Lifecycle of Scholarly Publishing)

22 pages, 677 KB

Open AccessReview

Research on Diamond Open Access in the Long Shadow of Science Policy

by Niels Taubert

Publications 2026, 14(1), 20; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010020 - 19 Mar 2026

Abstract

This review paper reviews research literature on Diamond Open Access (DOA) journals—sometimes also called Platinum Open Access—that was produced after this journal segment started to become a priority in European research policy around 2020. It contextualizes the current science policy debate, critically examines [...] Read more.

This review paper reviews research literature on Diamond Open Access (DOA) journals—sometimes also called Platinum Open Access—that was produced after this journal segment started to become a priority in European research policy around 2020. It contextualizes the current science policy debate, critically examines different understandings of DOA, and reviews studies on the role of such journals in scholarly communication. Most existing research consists of quantitative studies focusing on aspects such as the number of DOA journals, their publication output, the diversity of the landscape in terms of subject areas, languages, publishing entities, indexing in major databases, awareness and perception among scholars, cost analyses, as well as insights into the internal operations of DOA journals. The review shows that research on DOA journals is partly influenced by the science policy discourse in at least two ways: first, through the normativity inherent in that discourse, and second, through the temporality of policy-driven research of practical relevance, which leaves important aspects of the phenomenon understudied. Moreover, research on the DOA journal landscape has implications beyond understanding this particular journal segment, as it also challenges established views of the global system of scholarly communication. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diamond Open Access)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 2081 KB

Open AccessArticle

Research on Large Language Model-Based Bibliographic Cataloging Agent in the CNMARC Context

by Zhuoxi Tan, Xin Yang, Qinyu Chen and Tao Chen

Publications 2026, 14(1), 19; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010019 - 18 Mar 2026

Abstract

To address the efficiency and cost limitations of traditional manual cataloging, this study proposes a large language model-driven automated cataloging workflow in which the Metadata Extraction Agent (MEA), Description Cataloging Agent (DCA), Subject Analysis & Indexing Agent (SAIA), and Quality Control Agent (QCA) [...] Read more.

To address the efficiency and cost limitations of traditional manual cataloging, this study proposes a large language model-driven automated cataloging workflow in which the Metadata Extraction Agent (MEA), Description Cataloging Agent (DCA), Subject Analysis & Indexing Agent (SAIA), and Quality Control Agent (QCA) collaborate to perform cataloging tasks. Experiments are conducted using a dataset of over 33,000 CNMARC bibliographic records from a University Library, together with data from the Chinese Library Classification (5th edition). Meanwhile, the agent-based workflow framework directly employs large language models without additional enhancement techniques, thereby providing a useful experimental benchmark for evaluating future AI-assisted cataloging systems. The results show that the framework performs well in metadata recognition, bibliographic description, and macro-level classification tasks, and can relatively stably generate standardized records. However, limitations remain in fine-grained semantic indexing and the interpretation of complex contexts. Therefore, in light of the capability limitations revealed by the experimental results, the study argues that fully automated end-to-end cataloging relying solely on generative AI is not yet entirely feasible. Future improvements should integrate techniques such as retrieval-augmented generation, supervised fine-tuning, and structured reasoning prompts, while establishing traceable mechanisms to enhance the reliability of intelligent cataloging. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Overview on Today’s AI Tools for Authors)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 1029 KB

Open AccessArticle

Research with Epistemology: Are We Really Following the Scientific Method?

by Diego Lara-Haro, Alexander Haro-Sarango, Patricia López-Fraga and Angel Esquivel-Valverde

Publications 2026, 14(1), 18; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010018 - 7 Mar 2026

Cited by 1

Abstract

Epistemology underpins the scientific method by clarifying what counts as knowledge, which forms of evidence are admissible, and how procedures can legitimately support conclusions. Under accelerated publishing conditions, these assumptions are often left implicit, which can weaken the inferential coherence of peer-reviewed manuscripts. [...] Read more.

Epistemology underpins the scientific method by clarifying what counts as knowledge, which forms of evidence are admissible, and how procedures can legitimately support conclusions. Under accelerated publishing conditions, these assumptions are often left implicit, which can weaken the inferential coherence of peer-reviewed manuscripts. This study aimed to model reviewers’ perceived epistemological deficiencies as a multidimensional construct with an overarching global component. A 14-item instrument covering four latent domains was administered to 183 peer reviewers from a Latin American academic network. A second-order structural equation model was estimated using SEM with DWLS (lavaan). The model showed excellent fit (CFI ≈ 1.00; RMSEA = 0.000; SRMR = 0.033) and strong factor loadings, indicating a coherent global factor alongside distinct domain-specific components. Reviewers’ accumulated experience was positively associated with the global factor (β = 0.047; p = 0.013), whereas the recent volume of reviews was not statistically significant (p = 0.254). These results suggest that epistemological scrutiny may reflect more stable evaluative competencies than short-term reviewing activity. The instrument can inform editorial rubrics and reviewer training aimed at strengthening problem–theory–method coherence and reflexive methodological justification. Because the measure captures perceptions within a single regional network, further validation across disciplines and cultural contexts is recommended. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 602 KB

Open AccessArticle

Policies and Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Latin American Journals Indexed in Scopus and Classified According to the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR)

by Cristian Zahn-Muñoz, Patricio Viancos-González, Nancy Alarcón-Henríquez, Bastián Aravena-Niño and Ezequiel Martínez-Rojas

Publications 2026, 14(1), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010017 - 6 Mar 2026

Abstract

The emergence of artificial intelligence tools in scientific production is generating significant challenges for scientific integrity and editorial governance, prompting journals and publishers to develop normative guidelines for their use. This study analyzes the current state of guideline implementation among Latin American journals [...] Read more.

The emergence of artificial intelligence tools in scientific production is generating significant challenges for scientific integrity and editorial governance, prompting journals and publishers to develop normative guidelines for their use. This study analyzes the current state of guideline implementation among Latin American journals indexed in Scopus and classified according to the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR). A quantitative approach was adopted, complemented by a descriptive documentary analysis based on a detailed review of the websites of 1119 journals from 17 Latin American countries. The collected data were systematized using Excel and analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. The results indicate that only 27.2% of journals have explicit guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence, with a predominantly regulatory rather than punitive orientation that prioritizes technical support while restricting practices that compromise human intellectual control. Additionally, statistically significant differences were identified according to quality indicators, showing that journals with higher quality levels are more likely to have such guidelines. Overall, the findings reveal an incipient and heterogeneous regulatory development, underscoring the need to strengthen and harmonize editorial guidelines on artificial intelligence in order to safeguard transparency, clarify the responsibilities of the actors involved in the production and publication process, and protect the integrity of scientific communication. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue AI in Academic Metrics and Impact Analysis)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 494 KB

Open AccessSystematic Review

Open Data Research in Spain Published via the Diamond Route: A Systematic Review

by Ricardo Curto-Rodríguez, Alberto Leal-Matilla, Daniel Ferrández and Rafael Marcos-Sánchez

Publications 2026, 14(1), 16; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010016 - 3 Mar 2026

Abstract

In the information society, open data is an important resource for creating economic value. This study conducts a systematic review, following the PRISMA methodology, of articles published between 2000 and 2025 in Scopus and Web of Science that include the terms Open Data [...] Read more.

In the information society, open data is an important resource for creating economic value. This study conducts a systematic review, following the PRISMA methodology, of articles published between 2000 and 2025 in Scopus and Web of Science that include the terms Open Data and Spain (in Spanish or English) in their title and/or abstract, with the aim of assessing how Law 37/2007 on the reuse of public sector information has influenced the publications analyzed. After identifying 240 articles in Scopus and 109 in Web of Science and applying the exclusion criteria, we observe that 37 studies use the Diamond Open-Access publishing route. The results are organized into four categories corresponding to the research questions, which represent a meaningful theoretical contribution and enhance current knowledge on open data research in Spain. The identification of obstacles to the effective use of open data—such as the lack of standardization, poor information quality, and the vague definition of reuse conditions—entails practical implications of significant value for managers of open data portals seeking to improve their initiatives. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diamond Open Access)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2134 KB

Open AccessSystematic Review

Trajectories of the Global Innovation Index and Its Bibliometric Footprint: From the Global Level to Ecuador and Peru

by Alexander Haro-Sarango, Silvia Cachay-Salcedo, Julián Coronel-Reyes, Jessica Saavedra-Vasconez, Elizabeth Proaño-Altamirano and Rosa Salcedo-Dávalos

Publications 2026, 14(1), 15; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010015 - 24 Feb 2026

Abstract

This article examines how the Global Innovation Index (GII) has become the dominant technical language for assessing and legitimizing countries’ innovation performance, and what this implies for middle-income economies such as Ecuador and Peru. We conduct a systematic review of 89 Scopus-indexed studies, [...] Read more.

This article examines how the Global Innovation Index (GII) has become the dominant technical language for assessing and legitimizing countries’ innovation performance, and what this implies for middle-income economies such as Ecuador and Peru. We conduct a systematic review of 89 Scopus-indexed studies, combining bibliometrics with natural language processing of abstracts. The results reveal a largely optimistic discourse that frames innovation as a national, systemic construct—structured around institutions, human capital, infrastructure, market and business sophistication—while relying heavily on standardized GII metrics. Topic modeling and sentiment analysis show limited critical scrutiny of the index itself. The comparative analysis of Ecuador and Peru highlights persistent gaps between innovation inputs and outputs, with Peru leading in human capital and markets but lagging in business sophistication, and Ecuador constrained by institutional and market weaknesses. We argue that the GII should be used as a diagnostic and reform tool, not merely as a reputational ranking. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 877 KB

Open AccessArticle

Legal Literacy and Institutional Barriers to the Digital Transformation of Libraries in Kazakhstan: A Comparative Study of Academic and Public Libraries

by Danakul Seitimbetova, Kalima Tuyenbayeva, Darukhan Karzhaubayeva, Naim Ürkmez and Galiya Ibrayeva

Publications 2026, 14(1), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010014 - 23 Feb 2026

Abstract

Digital transformation of libraries is a key driver of the development of scholarly communication, open access, and knowledge management; however, its sustainability largely depends on institutional and legal conditions. This study examines the level of legal literacy among library professionals and the institutional [...] Read more.

Digital transformation of libraries is a key driver of the development of scholarly communication, open access, and knowledge management; however, its sustainability largely depends on institutional and legal conditions. This study examines the level of legal literacy among library professionals and the institutional barriers affecting the digital transformation of academic and public libraries in the Republic of Kazakhstan. A mixed-methods research design was employed, combining a quantitative online survey of library professionals with a qualitative analysis of open-ended responses provided by library managers. The findings indicate that, despite a relatively high level of basic digital skills, legal literacy related to copyright, licensing, and open access remains insufficiently institutionalized. Significant differences were identified between academic and public libraries, reflecting variations in their institutional missions and managerial priorities. Based on the interpretation of empirical results and their comparison with international literature, the study proposes a conceptual model of digital–legal transformation of libraries that integrates digital competencies, legal literacy, and institutional support mechanisms. Additionally, a phased roadmap is developed to support the sustainable implementation of open-access practices and the development of institutional repositories within a nascent open science ecosystem. The study’s results inform the development of institutional digital strategies for libraries and contribute to the design of professional development programs for library staff. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Academic Libraries in Supporting Research)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

26 pages, 1219 KB

Open AccessSystematic Review

A Systematic Review of Arts Practice-Based Research Abstracts from Small and/or Specialist Institutions

by Samantha Broadhead, Henry Gonnet and Marianna Tsionki

Publications 2026, 14(1), 13; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010013 - 12 Feb 2026

Abstract

Through this qualitative systematic review, the authors ask the following: To what extent is the 300-word abstract fit for purpose in representing art and design practice-based research outputs on small and/or specialist institutional repositories? The abstract is an important part of the metadata [...] Read more.

Through this qualitative systematic review, the authors ask the following: To what extent is the 300-word abstract fit for purpose in representing art and design practice-based research outputs on small and/or specialist institutional repositories? The abstract is an important part of the metadata when an Arts Practice-Based Output (APBO) is deposited on a repository. APBOs are non-traditional item types resulting from creative/artistic research processes. Examples include exhibitions, artefacts and digital videos. Little is known about how effectively these abstracts communicate research processes and insights across the art and design sector. This study aims to investigate how well the abstract communicates information about the arts practice-based research through a systematic review of APBOs. The eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review were as follows: APBOs must be from the date range January 2019 to January 2024, be an item type where the 300-word abstract is required, the abstract must be part of the publicly available metadata for the item, and outputs must be practice-based and from the art and design field. The date range (2019–2024) was employed because, during this time, APBOs had gained recognition in the wider research environment. APBOs from the reviewers’ institutional repository were not included in this study to avoid bias that could skew the results of the review. The data repositories from small and/or specialist Higher Education Institutions in the United Kingdom were searched for outputs which appeared to meet the eligibility criteria. These types of institution prioritise and produce more of these output types. A quality tool appropriate for creative/artistic research was applied to the identified dataset of APBOs. The resulting 27 APBOs’ 300-word abstracts were analysed using a thematic approach. Findings suggest that the 300-word abstracts contained information about the quality indicators such as whether the project got funding, the identities of prestigious collaborators and/or dissemination vehicles, and the international recognition of the research. Other identified themes were methodologies, contribution to knowledge, subject matter and item type. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

28 pages, 2193 KB

Open AccessArticle

Mapping One Health and Sustainability from 2007 to 2024: Multi-Period Evolution with Bibliometric and Content Insights from Türkiye’s Oldest Veterinary Journal

by Suzan Yalçın and Sıddika Songül Yalçın

Publications 2026, 14(1), 12; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010012 - 11 Feb 2026

Abstract

Background: The One Health framework emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health and is closely linked with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a longitudinal bibliometric analysis of the Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi to assess how [...] Read more.

Background: The One Health framework emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health and is closely linked with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study conducted a longitudinal bibliometric analysis of the Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi to assess how its scientific output from 2007 to 2024 reflects evolving One Health and sustainability-related research priorities. Methods: A total of 978 records covering the journal’s entire SCI-indexed period were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS). Bibliometric analyses were conducted in R Studio (v4.5.1) using the Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny package. Keyword standardization, synonym harmonization, and clustering were applied to generate keyword co-occurrence networks, thematic maps, and multi-period thematic evolution analyses (2007–2013; 2014–2019; 2020–2024). WoS–SDG tagging was integrated and manually validated to evaluate alignment with sustainability and One Health domains. Results: The analysis revealed a clear thematic transition over time. Early publications focused on classical veterinary and production-oriented topics such as reproduction, physiology, nutrition, and livestock performance. During the mid-period, increasing emphasis was placed on epidemiology, pathogen detection, and antimicrobial resistance. In the most recent period, molecular diagnostics, infectious disease ecology, and environmental health emerged as central clusters. SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) remained dominant but declined from approximately 79% of publications in 2007–2014 to 69% in 2020–2024, while SDG 13 (Climate Action) increased markedly after 2019, reaching mean values around 10%, indicating diversification toward environmental sustainability. The growing integration of diagnostic terms such as Polymerase Chain Reaction, cytokines, and histopathology reflects increasing research capacity and methodological modernization consistent with One Health priorities. Conclusions: The journal has undergone a substantial evolution from a predominantly traditional veterinary focus toward a more integrative, interdisciplinary, and sustainability-oriented research agenda aligned with One Health and SDG frameworks. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 740 KB

Open AccessArticle

Publication Patterns in Engineering: A Quantitative Comparison of Open Access and Subscription-Based Journals

by Luís Eduardo Pilatti, Luiz Alberto Pilatti, Gustavo Dambiski Gomes de Carvalho and Luis Mauricio Martins de Resende

Publications 2026, 14(1), 11; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010011 - 10 Feb 2026

Abstract

We compare the publication performance of open-access (OA) and subscription-based (SB) journals in Engineering using journal-level indicators from Scopus (CiteScore 2023 view; data collected on 2 December 2024). We analysed 3013 active Engineering journals with an assigned CiteScore quartile (Q1–Q4, where Q1 denotes [...] Read more.

We compare the publication performance of open-access (OA) and subscription-based (SB) journals in Engineering using journal-level indicators from Scopus (CiteScore 2023 view; data collected on 2 December 2024). We analysed 3013 active Engineering journals with an assigned CiteScore quartile (Q1–Q4, where Q1 denotes the highest CiteScore quartile), of which 770 are labelled OA in Scopus; the remaining journals in each stratum were classified as SB. We stratified journals by CiteScore quartile and by the top 10% CiteScore percentile. We examined four indicators for 2020–2023: CiteScore 2023, total citations, number of published documents, and the percentage of cited articles. Because citation and publication counts are strongly right-skewed, we report medians and use Mann–Whitney tests with effect sizes (Cliff’s delta) and false discovery rate correction; Welch tests on log-transformed counts are used as sensitivity analyses. SB journals exhibit substantially higher citation and document medians across all quartiles and in the top 10% stratum, whereas CiteScore medians are very similar between access models. OA journals represent about one quarter of Engineering journals in Scopus, but remain underrepresented in the top 10% segment (125 of 484). Overall, OA provides a competitive level of impact, while SB titles still dominate accumulated visibility and editorial scale in Engineering. Full article

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Journal Description

Publications

Latest Articles

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Highly Accessed Articles

Latest Books

E-Mail Alert

News

Topics

Conferences

Special Issues

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI