Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
10.0
2.5
Journals
Publications
Editor’s Choice
share announcement

Editor’s Choice Articles

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
28 pages, 644 KB  
Article
Reckoning with Retractions in Research Funding Reviews: The Case of China
by Shaoxiong Brian Xu and Guangwei Hu
Publications 2025, 13(3), 41; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13030041 - 4 Sep 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 7306
Abstract
China’s retraction crisis has raised concerns about research integrity and accountability within its scientific community and beyond. To address this issue, we proposed in an earlier publication that Chinese research funders incorporate retraction records into the evaluation of research funding applications by establishing [...] Read more.
China’s retraction crisis has raised concerns about research integrity and accountability within its scientific community and beyond. To address this issue, we proposed in an earlier publication that Chinese research funders incorporate retraction records into the evaluation of research funding applications by establishing a retraction-based review system. This review system would debar researchers with retraction records from applying for funding for a specified period. However, our earlier proposal lacked practical guidance on how to operationalize such a review system. In this article, we expand on our proposal by fleshing out the proposed ten debarment determinants and offering a framework for quantifying the duration of funding ineligibility. Additionally, we outline the critical steps for implementing the retraction-based review system, address the major challenges to its effective and sustainable adoption, and propose viable solutions to these challenges. Finally, we discuss the benefits of implementing the review system, emphasizing its potential to strengthen research integrity and foster a culture of accountability in the Chinese academic community. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

32 pages, 4415 KB  
Review
Disinformation in the Digital Age: Climate Change, Media Dynamics, and Strategies for Resilience
by Andrea Tomassi, Andrea Falegnami and Elpidio Romano
Publications 2025, 13(2), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020024 - 6 May 2025
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 11061
Abstract
Scientific disinformation has emerged as a critical challenge at the interface of science and society. This paper examines how false or misleading scientific content proliferates across both social media and traditional media and evaluates strategies to counteract its spread. We conducted a comprehensive [...] Read more.
Scientific disinformation has emerged as a critical challenge at the interface of science and society. This paper examines how false or misleading scientific content proliferates across both social media and traditional media and evaluates strategies to counteract its spread. We conducted a comprehensive literature review of research on scientific misinformation across disciplines and regions, with particular focus on climate change and public health as exemplars. Our findings indicate that social media algorithms and user dynamics can amplify false scientific claims, as seen in case studies of viral misinformation campaigns on vaccines and climate change. Traditional media, meanwhile, are not immune to spreading inaccuracies—journalistic practices such as sensationalism or “false balance” in reporting have at times distorted scientific facts, impacting public understanding. We review efforts to fight disinformation, including technological tools for detection, the application of inoculation theory and prebunking techniques, and collaborative approaches that bridge scientists and journalists. To empower individuals, we propose practical guidelines for critically evaluating scientific information sources and emphasize the importance of digital and scientific literacy. Finally, we discuss methods to quantify the prevalence and impact of scientific disinformation—ranging from social network analysis to surveys of public belief—and compare trends across regions and scientific domains. Our results underscore that combating scientific disinformation requires an interdisciplinary, multi-pronged approach, combining improvements in science communication, education, and policy. We conducted a scoping review of 85 open-access studies focused on climate-related misinformation and disinformation, selected through a systematic screening process based on PRISMA criteria. This approach was chosen to address the lack of comprehensive mappings that synthesize key themes and identify research gaps in this fast-growing field. The analysis classified the literature into 17 thematic clusters, highlighting key trends, gaps, and emerging challenges in the field. Our results reveal a strong dominance of studies centered on social media amplification, political denialism, and cognitive inoculation strategies, while underlining a lack of research on fact-checking mechanisms and non-Western contexts. We conclude with recommendations for strengthening the resilience of both the public and information ecosystems against the spread of false scientific claims. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Open Science: Developments and Disinformation Regarding Scientific Information)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1499 KB  
Article
Evaluation of Content Quality of Online Health Information by Global Quality Score: A Case Study of Researchers Misnaming It and Citing Secondary Sources
by Andy Wai Kan Yeung
Publications 2025, 13(2), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020023 - 1 May 2025
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 2956
Abstract
The Global Quality Score (GQS) is one of the most frequently used tools to evaluate the content quality of online health information. To the author’s knowledge, it is frequently misnamed as the Global Quality Scale, and occasionally secondary sources are cited as the [...] Read more.
The Global Quality Score (GQS) is one of the most frequently used tools to evaluate the content quality of online health information. To the author’s knowledge, it is frequently misnamed as the Global Quality Scale, and occasionally secondary sources are cited as the original source of the tool. This work aimed to reveal the current situation especially regarding the citations among published studies. Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed were queried to identify papers that mentioned the use of the GQS. Among a total of 411 analyzed papers, 45.0% misnamed it as Global Quality Scale, and 46.5% did not cite the primary source published in 2007 to credit it as the original source. Another 80 references were also cited from time to time as the source of the GQS, led by a secondary source published in 2012. There was a decreasing trend in citing the primary source when using the GQS. Among the 12 papers that claimed that the GQS was validated, half of them cited the primary source to justify the claim, but in fact the original publication did not mention anything about its validation. To conclude, future studies should name and cite the GQS properly to minimize confusion. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 247 KB  
Article
From Fees to Free: Comparing APC-Based and Diamond Open Access Journals in Engineering
by Luís Eduardo Pilatti, Luiz Alberto Pilatti, Gustavo Dambiski Gomes de Carvalho and Luis Mauricio Martins de Resende
Publications 2025, 13(2), 16; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020016 - 1 Apr 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 14071
Abstract
This study analyzes the impact of different Open Access (OA) publication models in engineering, comparing journals that charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) with those operating under the Diamond OA model. A total of 757 engineering OA journals, comprising 504 APC-based and 253 Diamond [...] Read more.
This study analyzes the impact of different Open Access (OA) publication models in engineering, comparing journals that charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) with those operating under the Diamond OA model. A total of 757 engineering OA journals, comprising 504 APC-based and 253 Diamond OA journals, were examined using bibliometric data from 2020 to 2023. The analysis focused on four key metrics: CiteScore, total citations, number of published articles, and the percentage of cited articles. The results indicate that APC-based journals dominate the upper quartiles (Q1 and Q2) regarding absolute citation counts, primarily driven by high-volume mega-journals such as IEEE Access. However, Diamond OA journals exhibit a higher proportion of cited articles (88.8% compared to 83.4% in APC-based journals) within the top 10% category. Despite their benefits in providing cost-free dissemination, Diamond OA journals account for only 8.4% of the 3012 active engineering journals indexed in Scopus, highlighting sustainability and visibility challenges. The findings suggest that, while APC-based journals achieve higher absolute citation counts, editorial reputation and visibility strategies significantly influence citation performance. This study contributes to the ongoing discussion on the financial sustainability and equity of OA publishing in engineering. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diamond Open Access)
21 pages, 1577 KB  
Article
Does Publisher Volume Matter? A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Scopus Journal Publishing Patterns
by Eungi Kim
Publications 2025, 13(2), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020017 - 1 Apr 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 6233
Abstract
The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between publisher volume—the number of journals a publisher produces—and journal publishing patterns in Scopus, including various journal metrics such as the h-index, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and journal quartiles. The SCImago database, which [...] Read more.
The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between publisher volume—the number of journals a publisher produces—and journal publishing patterns in Scopus, including various journal metrics such as the h-index, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and journal quartiles. The SCImago database, which is derived from Scopus data, serves as a proxy for journal impact and influence. The analysis also considered factors such as Open Access (OA) status, geographical location, and subject areas. Using the 2023 SJR dataset, publishers were classified into four categories: V1 (single journal), V2 (2–9 journals), V3 (10–99 journals), and V4 (100+ journals). The findings showed that V4 publishers accounted for 44.5% of Scopus-indexed journals despite comprising only 0.3% of all publishers, whereas V1 publishers represented 78.6% of all publishers but contributed only 21.3% of journals. High-volume publishers had more journals ranked in Q1 and Q2, while lower-volume publishers were more concentrated in Q3 and Q4. Results from the linear mixed-effects model indicated that publisher volume was associated with journal metrics, with higher-volume publishers generally achieving higher h-index and SJR scores. Western Europe and North America had the highest number of V4 publishers, whereas China, Spain, and Italy exhibited strong journal production but had fewer publishers in the highest-volume category. These results illustrate the dominance of a small group of high-volume (V4) publishers and the challenges smaller publishers face in gaining visibility and impact. They also underscore the need to consider policies that foster a more balanced and equitable scholarly publishing environment, particularly for underrepresented regions and subject areas. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 1917 KB  
Article
Forecasting the Scientific Production Volumes of G7 and BRICS Countries in a Comparative Analysis
by Tindaro Cicero
Publications 2025, 13(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13010006 - 7 Feb 2025
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3810
Abstract
This study applies ARIMA models to forecast scientific production trends among G7 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) countries using Scopus data from 1996 to 2023. The analysis [...] Read more.
This study applies ARIMA models to forecast scientific production trends among G7 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) countries using Scopus data from 1996 to 2023. The analysis shows that G7 countries maintain steady growth driven by established research infrastructures, while BRICS nations, particularly China, display accelerated growth due to substantial investments in R&D. The forecasts indicate that China could reach over 2,000,000 indexed scientific publications annually by 2030, potentially reshaping the global research landscape. These findings provide valuable insights for policymakers and research institutions, highlighting the shifting dynamics of global scientific leadership and emphasizing the importance of sustained investment in research to remain competitive. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 476 KB  
Opinion
It Takes a Village! Editorship, Advocacy, and Research in Running an Open Access Data Journal
by Mandy Wigdorowitz, Marton Ribary, Andrea Farina, Eleonora Lima, Daniele Borkowski, Paola Marongiu, Amanda H. Sorensen, Christelle Timis and Barbara McGillivray
Publications 2024, 12(3), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12030024 - 13 Aug 2024
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 4365
Abstract
Partaking in the editorial process of an academic journal is both a challenging and rewarding experience. It takes a village of dedicated individuals with a vested interest in the dissemination and sharing of high-quality research outputs. As members of the editorial team of [...] Read more.
Partaking in the editorial process of an academic journal is both a challenging and rewarding experience. It takes a village of dedicated individuals with a vested interest in the dissemination and sharing of high-quality research outputs. As members of the editorial team of an open access data journal, we reflect on the emergence of data-driven open research, a new journal genre (data paper), and a new journal type (data journal) in the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences (AHSS). Access to data—the currency of empirical research—is valuable to the research community, crucial to scientific integrity, and leads to cumulative advancements in knowledge. It therefore requires significant investment and appropriate venues for dissemination. We illustrate the necessity of raising awareness about data-driven open research and best practices in data-driven publishing. We discuss how it involves building a community of authors and readers, establishing a company of editors, reviewers, and support staff, and passing on the practice, which has been challenging the status quo in research and publishing. Potential future directions are considered, including data peer review and reward, recognition, and funding structures for data sharing. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1610 KB  
Article
Bibliometric Analysis of Papers Dealing with Dental Videos on YouTube
by Andy Wai Kan Yeung, Maima Matin, Michel Edwar Mickael, Sybille Behrens, Dalibor Hrg, Michał Ławiński, Fabian Peter Hammerle and Atanas G. Atanasov
Publications 2024, 12(3), 22; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12030022 - 25 Jul 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2892
Abstract
The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis to discover what topics of dental YouTube videos have been investigated by the scientific literature, and evaluate how video characteristics were related to citation count. The Scopus electronic literature database was accessed [...] Read more.
The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric analysis to discover what topics of dental YouTube videos have been investigated by the scientific literature, and evaluate how video characteristics were related to citation count. The Scopus electronic literature database was accessed to identify relevant papers. After screening, a total of 128 papers entered the analysis. The bibliographic data were provided by Scopus, whereas content evaluations were manually performed. Most papers evaluated videos recorded in English (85.9%). Each of the 128 papers analyzed a mean (±SD) of 79.2 ± 61.6 videos. Mean journal impact factor was 1.8 ± 1.4, and mean citation count was 13.0 ± 22.4. The preference for publication of papers was inclined towards dental journals (80.5%), with the majority (54.7%) being published without open access. Papers dealing with videos targeting patients/public had higher citations than those targeting dental professionals only (14.1 ± 23.4 vs. 4.0 ± 6.3, p < 0.001). The most represented as well as the most highly cited specialty of the dental YouTube publications was oral and maxillofacial surgery/oral medicine. Some twin or triplet studies published in the same year covering the same topic were identified, but they often covered a different number of videos. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 3527 KB  
Article
Research on Disinformation in Academic Studies: Perspectives through a Bibliometric Analysis
by Nuria Navarro-Sierra, Silvia Magro-Vela and Raquel Vinader-Segura
Publications 2024, 12(2), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12020014 - 7 May 2024
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 5100
Abstract
Disinformation is a phenomenon of concern to all political systems, as it poses a threat to freedom and democracy through the manipulation of public opinion aimed at eroding institutions. This paper presents a bibliometric and systematized study which allows the establishment of a [...] Read more.
Disinformation is a phenomenon of concern to all political systems, as it poses a threat to freedom and democracy through the manipulation of public opinion aimed at eroding institutions. This paper presents a bibliometric and systematized study which allows the establishment of a comprehensive view of the research and current state of academic investigations on disinformation. To this end, a content analysis of the scientific articles indexed in Scopus up to 31 December 2023 has been carried out based on three categories of analysis: journals, authors and investigations. Similarly, a systematic study of the 50 most cited articles in this sample was performed in order to gain a deeper understanding of the nature, motivations and methodological approaches of these investigations. The results indicate that disinformation is a research topic which has gained great interest in the academic community since 2018, with special mention to the impact of COVID-19 and the vaccines against this disease. Thus, it can be concluded that disinformation is an object of study which attracts significant attention and which must be approached from transdisciplinarity to respond to a phenomenon of great complexity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Disinformation in Science Communication: Threats, Challenges and Potential Solutions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1810 KB  
Article
The Time from Submission to Publication in Primary Health Care Journals: A Cross-Sectional Study
by Tsung-An Chen, Ming-Hwai Lin, Yu-Chun Chen and Tzeng-Ji Chen
Publications 2024, 12(2), 13; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12020013 - 28 Apr 2024
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 11940
Abstract
Background: The time from submission to publication can significantly impact the speed of knowledge dissemination and is influenced by multiple factors. This research aims to investigate the time from submission to publication of journals of primary health care and to explore the factors [...] Read more.
Background: The time from submission to publication can significantly impact the speed of knowledge dissemination and is influenced by multiple factors. This research aims to investigate the time from submission to publication of journals of primary health care and to explore the factors that influence this duration. Methods: We selected journals of primary health care and extracted their impact factors, annual publication frequencies, and open access status. The time from submission to acceptance (SA lag), acceptance to publication (AP lag), and submission to publication (SP lag) were calculated. Additionally, we conducted statistical analyses to determine whether impact factors, annual publication frequencies, and journal open access status had an influence on publication time. Results: This study revealed the average SP lag was 243.4 days (interquartile range, IQR 159–306), the average SA lag was 177.8 days (IQR 99–229.3), and the average AP lag was 65.6 days (IQR 14–101). Variations were observed in SP lag, SA lag, and AP lag among different journals. SP lag generally decreased with higher impact factors. Journals with open access had longer SA lag but shorter AP lag. There was a general trend of decreasing SP lag and SA lag with an increasing number of annual publications, but no clear trend was observed for AP lag. Conclusions: Improvements are needed in reducing the duration from submission to publication for primary health care journals. Significant variation exists among journals. Additionally, factors such as the impact factor, open access status, and the number of annual publications may influence publication speed. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

30 pages, 1479 KB  
Article
Coping with the Inequity and Inefficiency of the H-Index: A Cross-Disciplinary Empirical Analysis
by Fabio Zagonari and Paolo Foschi
Publications 2024, 12(2), 12; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12020012 - 22 Apr 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 5092
Abstract
This paper measures two main inefficiency features (many publications other than articles; many co-authors’ reciprocal citations) and two main inequity features (more co-authors in some disciplines; more citations for authors with more experience). It constructs a representative dataset based on a cross-disciplinary balanced [...] Read more.
This paper measures two main inefficiency features (many publications other than articles; many co-authors’ reciprocal citations) and two main inequity features (more co-authors in some disciplines; more citations for authors with more experience). It constructs a representative dataset based on a cross-disciplinary balanced sample (10,000 authors with at least one publication indexed in Scopus from 2006 to 2015). It estimates to what extent four additional improvements of the H-index as top-down regulations (∆Hh = Hh − Hh+1 from H1 = based on publications to H5 = net per-capita per-year based on articles) account for inefficiency and inequity across twenty-five disciplines and four subjects. Linear regressions and ANOVA results show that the single improvements of the H-index considerably and decreasingly explain the inefficiency and inequity features but make these vaguely comparable across disciplines and subjects, while the overall improvement of the H-index (H1–H5) marginally explains these features but make disciplines and subjects clearly comparable, to a greater extent across subjects than disciplines. Fitting a Gamma distribution to H5 for each discipline and subject by maximum likelihood shows that the estimated probability densities and the percentages of authors characterised by H5 ≥ 1 to H5 ≥ 3 are different across disciplines but similar across subjects. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1435 KB  
Article
Application of ChatGPT in Information Literacy Instructional Design
by Jelena Madunić and Matija Sovulj
Publications 2024, 12(2), 11; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12020011 - 15 Apr 2024
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 8088
Abstract
Recent developments in generative artificial intelligence tools have prompted immediate reactions in the academic library community. While most studies focus on the potential impact on academic integrity, this work explored constructive applications of ChatGPT in the design of instructional materials for courses in [...] Read more.
Recent developments in generative artificial intelligence tools have prompted immediate reactions in the academic library community. While most studies focus on the potential impact on academic integrity, this work explored constructive applications of ChatGPT in the design of instructional materials for courses in academic information literacy. The starting point was the use of openly licenced information resources or content infrastructure as facilitators in the creation of educational materials. In the first phase, course teaching material was developed using a prompt engineering strategy, predefined standards, and a prompt script. As a second step, we experimented with designing a custom chatbot model connected to a pre-defined corpus of source documents. The results demonstrated that the final teaching material required careful revision and optimisation before use in an actual instructional programme. The experimental design of the custom chatbot was able to query specific user-defined documents. Taken together, these findings suggest that the strategic and well-planned use of ChatGPT technology in content creation can have substantial benefits in terms of time and cost efficiency. In the context of information literacy, the results provide a practical and innovative solution to integrate the new technology tool into instructional practices. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 10th Anniversary Special Issue "PUBMET2023 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science")
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 5472 KB  
Article
Bibliometric Overview of ChatGPT: New Perspectives in Social Sciences
by Marian Oliński, Krzysztof Krukowski and Kacper Sieciński
Publications 2024, 12(1), 9; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12010009 - 21 Mar 2024
Cited by 20 | Viewed by 8371
Abstract
This study delves into a bibliometric analysis of ChatGPT, an AI tool adept at analysing and generating text, highlighting its influence in the realm of social sciences. By harnessing data from the Scopus database, a total of 814 relevant publications were selected and [...] Read more.
This study delves into a bibliometric analysis of ChatGPT, an AI tool adept at analysing and generating text, highlighting its influence in the realm of social sciences. By harnessing data from the Scopus database, a total of 814 relevant publications were selected and scrutinised through VOSviewer, focusing on elements such as co-citations, keywords and international collaborations. The objective is to unearth prevailing trends and knowledge gaps in scholarly discourse regarding ChatGPT’s application in social sciences. Concentrating on articles from the year 2023, this analysis underscores the rapid evolution of this research domain, reflecting the ongoing digital transformation of society. This study presents a broad thematic picture of the analysed works, indicating a diversity of perspectives—from ethical and technological to sociological—regarding the implementation of ChatGPT in the fields of social sciences. This reveals an interest in various aspects of using ChatGPT, which may suggest a certain openness of the educational sector to adopting new technologies in the teaching process. These observations make a contribution to the field of social sciences, suggesting potential directions for future research, policy or practice, especially in less represented areas such as the socio-legal implications of AI, advocating for a multidisciplinary approach. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 740 KB  
Review
Benefits of Citizen Science for Libraries
by Dolores Mumelaš and Alisa Martek
Publications 2024, 12(1), 8; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12010008 - 8 Mar 2024
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 6415
Abstract
Participating in collaborative scientific research through citizen science, a component of open science, holds significance for both citizen scientists and professional researchers. Yet, the advantages for those orchestrating citizen science initiatives are often overlooked. Organizers encompass a diverse range, including governmental entities, non-governmental [...] Read more.
Participating in collaborative scientific research through citizen science, a component of open science, holds significance for both citizen scientists and professional researchers. Yet, the advantages for those orchestrating citizen science initiatives are often overlooked. Organizers encompass a diverse range, including governmental entities, non-governmental organizations, corporations, universities, and institutions like libraries. For libraries, citizen science holds importance by fostering heightened civic and research interests, promoting scientific publishing, and contributing to overall scientific progress. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the specific ways in which citizen science can benefit libraries and how libraries can effectively utilize citizen science to achieve their goals. The paper is based on a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles that discuss the direct benefits of citizen science on libraries. A list of the main benefits of citizen science for libraries has been compiled from the literature. Additionally, the reasons why it is crucial for libraries to communicate the benefits of citizen science for their operations have been highlighted, particularly in terms of encouraging other libraries to actively engage in citizen science projects. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 10th Anniversary Special Issue "PUBMET2023 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science")
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 717 KB  
Article
FAIRness of Research Data in the European Humanities Landscape
by Ljiljana Poljak Bilić and Kristina Posavec
Publications 2024, 12(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12010006 - 5 Mar 2024
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 4575
Abstract
This paper explores the landscape of research data in the humanities in the European context, delving into their diversity and the challenges of defining and sharing them. It investigates three aspects: the types of data in the humanities, their representation in repositories, and [...] Read more.
This paper explores the landscape of research data in the humanities in the European context, delving into their diversity and the challenges of defining and sharing them. It investigates three aspects: the types of data in the humanities, their representation in repositories, and their alignment with the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). By reviewing datasets in repositories, this research determines the dominant data types, their openness, licensing, and compliance with the FAIR principles. This research provides important insight into the heterogeneous nature of humanities data, their representation in the repository, and their alignment with FAIR principles, highlighting the need for improved accessibility and reusability to improve the overall quality and utility of humanities research data. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 10th Anniversary Special Issue "PUBMET2023 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science")
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 1987 KB  
Article
Tracing the Evolution of Reviews and Research Articles in the Biomedical Literature: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Abstracts
by Stefano Guizzardi, Maria Teresa Colangelo, Prisco Mirandola and Carlo Galli
Publications 2024, 12(1), 2; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12010002 - 12 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3512
Abstract
We previously examined the diachronic shifts in the narrative structure of research articles (RAs) and review manuscripts using abstract corpora from MEDLINE. This study employs Nini’s Multidimensional Analysis Tagger (MAT) on the same datasets to explore five linguistic dimensions (D1–5) in these two [...] Read more.
We previously examined the diachronic shifts in the narrative structure of research articles (RAs) and review manuscripts using abstract corpora from MEDLINE. This study employs Nini’s Multidimensional Analysis Tagger (MAT) on the same datasets to explore five linguistic dimensions (D1–5) in these two sub-genres of biomedical literature, offering insights into evolving writing practices over 30 years. Analyzing a sample exceeding 1.2 million abstracts, we observe a shared reinforcement of an informational, emotionally detached tone (D1) in both RAs and reviews. Additionally, there is a gradual departure from narrative devices (D2), coupled with an increase in context-independent content (D3). Both RAs and reviews maintain low levels of overt persuasion (D4) while shifting focus from abstract content to emphasize author agency and identity. A comparison of linguistic features underlying these dimensions reveals often independent changes in RAs and reviews, with both tending to converge toward standardized stylistic norms. Full article
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-16
Back to TopTop