Portuguese publication in the aim of regional science: a study of articles published in RPER from 2003 to 2015

This paper is a study of the full content of articles published by RPER, the Portuguese Review of Regional Studies, from the time it was launched in 2003 until the first quarter of 2015. RPER is a journal edited by the Portuguese section of the European Regional Science Association, which was established in the first half of the 1980s. The Association (APDR) and the journal are the result of contributions by researchers and technicians from different scientific fields, including mainly Economics, Geography, Sociology, Engineering and Architecture. The main focus of these contributions is the socio-economic life of concrete sites, and the way this life is conditioned by resources and capabilities, the historical and cultural heritage and institutions. Content analysis was undertaken to identify the main subjects chosen during the total period under analysis, the nature of the articles published (theoretical or empirical) and the main analytical framework used. The analysis also covers sub-periods to investigate major trends found in terms of subjects chosen and analytical methods, questioning the rationale behind them. The paper concludes with a few notes regarding the social echo the research received and an identification of the main limitations of the research. In the first part of the article, we conduct a summary review of the genesis and evolution of Regional Science at international level to serve as a basis for the empirical approach developed.

Scientific mindfulness: A foundation for future themes in international business.

We conceptualize new ways to qualify what themes should dominate the future international business and management (IB/IM) research agenda by examining three questions: Whom should we ask? What should we ask, and which selection criteria should we apply? What are the contextual forces? Our main findings are the following: (1) wider perspectives from academia and practice would benefit both rigor and relevance; (2) four key forces are climate change, globalization, inequality, and sustainability; and (3) we propose scientific mindfulness as the way forward for generating themes in IB/IM research. Scientific mindfulness is a holistic, cross-disciplinary, and contextual approach, whereby researchers need to make sense of multiple perspectives with the betterment of society as the ultimate criterion.

Vom Finanz- zum Wissenschaftsbetrug : Methode, den Irrungen in der medizinischen Literatur beizukommen [From financial to scientific fraud : Methods to detect discrepancies in the medical literature].

Fraud is as old as Mankind. There are an enormous number of historical documents which show the interaction between truth and untruth; therefore it is not really surprising that the prevalence of publication discrepancies is increasing. More surprising is that new cases especially in the medical field generate such a huge astonishment. In financial mathematics a statistical tool for detection of fraud is known which uses the knowledge of Newcomb and Benford regarding the distribution of natural numbers. This distribution is not equal and lower numbers are more likely to be detected compared to higher ones. In this investigation all numbers contained in the blinded abstracts of the 2009 annual meeting of the Swiss Society of Anesthesia and Resuscitation (SGAR) were recorded and analyzed regarding the distribution. A manipulated abstract was also included in the investigation. The χ(2)-test was used to determine statistical differences between expected and observed counts of numbers. There was also a faked abstract integrated in the investigation. A p<0.05 was considered significant. The distribution of the 1,800 numbers in the 77 submitted abstracts followed Benford's law. The manipulated abstract was detected by statistical means (difference in expected versus observed p<0.05). Statistics cannot prove whether the content is true or not but can give some serious hints to look into the details in such conspicuous material. These are the first results of a test for the distribution of numbers presented in medical research.

Why do scientists migrate? A diffusion model

The article is intended to improve our understanding of the reasons underlying the intellectual migration of scientists from well-known cognitive domains to nascent scientific fields. To that purpose we present, first, a number of findings from the sociology of science that give different insights about this phenomenon. We then attempt to bring some of these insights together under the conceptual roof of an actor-based approach linking expected utility and diffusion theory. Intellectual migration is regarded as the rational choice of scientists who decide under uncertainty and on the base of a number of decision-making variables, which define probabilities, costs, and benefits of the migration.

Andalusian Health Repository: Promoting the scientific health output among professionals and providing citizens with quality health information

The Andalusian Public Health System (Sistema Sanitario Público de Andalucía -SSPA) Repository is the open environment where all the scientific output generated by the SSPA professionals, resulting from their medical care, research and administrative activities, is comprehensively collected and managed. This repository possesses special features which determined its development: the SSPA organization and its purpose as a health institution, the specific sets of documents that it generates and the stakeholders involved in it. The repository uses DSpace 1.6.2, to which several changes were implemented in order to achieve the SSPA initial goals and requirements. The main changes were: the addition of specific qualifiers to the Metadata Dublin Core scheme, the modification of the submission form, the integration of the MeSH Thesaurus as controlled vocabulary and the optimization of the advanced search tool. Another key point during the setting up of the repository was the initial batch ingest of the documents.

Análisis de la producción científica visible en internet de los técnicos de salud ambiental del Servicio Andaluz de Salud

Internet it is a powerful interactive communication channel with world scope, through which can be multiplied the visibility of the research of the professionals whose scientific production has a difficult diffusion by the conventionals media. It is presented an analysis of the scientific publications observed in the web in order to understand the different communication processes accomplished by the superior corps of environmental health technical of the Andalusian Health Service. Using the nominal relationship of the professionals, we used Google ‘search engine’ for all scientific publications located in the internet; we were made different bibliometric indicators as of the recovered records and was analyzed the time evolution of the scientific production, documental categories, geografic distribution, language, coauthors and institutional collaboration. It was identified a growing trend in the productivity of the publications in the last decade, mainly through communications to congresses (70.4%) and journals articles (16.9%). The publications mainly are located in spanish journals, that they are indexed on national and international databases. In all the Andalusian provinces was identified some published scientific communication. The indicator of coauthors is very high (95.77%) although the institutional participation is limited mainly to the primary attention districts, occupational centers of each professional (85.21%). The scientific publication patterns visualized in the web represent an important contribution for the knowledge of the characteristics of the environmental health professionals of the Andalusian health service, what provides avaluable information for the support of the information systems in public health.

Accelerated publication versus usual publication in 2 leading medical journals.

BACKGROUND: A number of medical journals have developed policies for accelerated publication of articles judged by the authors, the editors or the peer reviewers to be of special importance. However, the validity of these judgements is unknown. We therefore compared the importance of articles published on a "fast track" with those published in the usual way. METHODS: We identified 12 "case" articles--6 articles from the New England Journal of Medicine that were prereleased on the journal's Web site before publication in print and 6 "fast-tracked" articles from The Lancet. We then identified 12 "control" articles matched to the case articles according to journal, disease or procedure of focus, theme area and year of publication. Forty-two general internists rated the articles, using 10-point scales, on dimensions addressing the articles' importance, ease of applicability and impact on health outcomes. RESULTS: For each dimension, the mean score for the case articles was significantly higher than the mean score for the control articles: importance to clinical practice 7.6 v. 7.1 respectively (p = 0.001), importance from a public health perspective 6.5 v. 6.0 (p < 0.001), contribution to advancement of medical knowledge 6.2 v. 5.8 (p < 0.001), ease of applicability in practice 7.0 v. 6.5 (p < 0.001), potential impact on health outcomes 6.5 v. 5.9 (p < 0.001). Despite these general findings, in 5 of the 12 matched pairs of articles the control article had a higher mean score than the case article across all the dimensions. INTERPRETATION: The accelerated publication practices of 2 leading medical journals targeted articles that, on average, had slightly higher importance scores than similar articles published in the usual way. However, our finding of higher importance scores for control articles in 5 of the 12 matched pairs shows that current journal practices for selecting articles for expedited publication are inconsistent.

Scientific production on workplace bullying/harassment in dissertations and theses in the Brazilian scenario

OBJECTIVE To analyze scientific production about workplace bullying and harassment in dissertations and theses in Brazil, with emphasis on the year of publication; educational institution; area of knowledge; professional and academic background of the authors; keywords used; and concept map organization. METHOD Bibliometric study with a quantitative approach with a sample consisting of 57 papers, 5 theses and 52 dissertations, published between 2002 and 2012. RESULTS It was found that 2012 was the year with the highest number of publications in this topic area. The region that stood out was the Southeast. The institution with the highest number of publications was the Federal University of Santa Catarina. There was a predominance of dissertations and most publications were produced by researchers focused on a multidisciplinary perspective. CONCLUSION Expanding the views regarding bullying in order to disseminate scientific production was proposed, promoting further advancement of debates and raising pertinent questions.

Discovery of the faithfulness gene: a model of transmission and transformation of scientific information.

The purpose of this paper is to study the diffusion and transformation of scientific information in everyday discussions. Based on rumour models and social representations theory, the impact of interpersonal communication and pre-existing beliefs on transmission of the content of a scientific discovery was analysed. In three experiments, a communication chain was simulated to investigate how laypeople make sense of a genetic discovery first published in a scientific outlet, then reported in a mainstream newspaper and finally discussed in groups. Study 1 (N=40) demonstrated a transformation of information when the scientific discovery moved along the communication chain. During successive narratives, scientific expert terminology disappeared while scientific information associated with lay terminology persisted. Moreover, the idea of a discovery of a faithfulness gene emerged. Study 2 (N=70) revealed that transmission of the scientific message varied as a function of attitudes towards genetic explanations of behaviour (pro-genetics vs. anti-genetics). Pro-genetics employed more scientific terminology than anti-genetics. Study 3 (N=75) showed that endorsement of genetic explanations was related to descriptive accounts of the scientific information, whereas rejection of genetic explanations was related to evaluative accounts of the information.

Editorial research and the publication process in biomedicine and health: Report from the Esteve Foundation Discussion Group, December 2012.

Despite the fact that there are more than twenty thousand biomedical journals in the world, research into the work of editors and publication process in biomedical and health care journals is rare. In December 2012, the Esteve Foundation, a non-profit scientific institution that fosters progress in pharmacotherapy by means of scientific communication and discussion organized a discussion group of 7 editors and/or experts in peer review biomedical publishing. They presented findings of past editorial research, discussed the lack of competitive funding schemes and specialized journals for dissemination of editorial research, and reported on the great diversity of misconduct and conflict of interest policies, as well as adherence to reporting guidelines. Furthermore, they reported on the reluctance of editors to investigate allegations of misconduct or increase the level of data sharing in health research. In the end, they concluded that if editors are to remain gatekeepers of scientific knowledge they should reaffirm their focus on the integrity of the scientific record and completeness of the data they publish. Additionally, more research should be undertaken to understand why many journals are not adhering to editorial standards, and what obstacles editors face when engaging in editorial research.

Scientific value of systematic reviews: survey of editors of core clinical journals.

BACKGROUND: Synthesizing research evidence using systematic and rigorous methods has become a key feature of evidence-based medicine and knowledge translation. Systematic reviews (SRs) may or may not include a meta-analysis depending on the suitability of available data. They are often being criticised as 'secondary research' and denied the status of original research. Scientific journals play an important role in the publication process. How they appraise a given type of research influences the status of that research in the scientific community. We investigated the attitudes of editors of core clinical journals towards SRs and their value for publication.¦METHODS: We identified the 118 journals labelled as "core clinical journals" by the National Library of Medicine, USA in April 2009. The journals' editors were surveyed by email in 2009 and asked whether they considered SRs as original research projects; whether they published SRs; and for which section of the journal they would consider a SR manuscript.¦RESULTS: The editors of 65 journals (55%) responded. Most respondents considered SRs to be original research (71%) and almost all journals (93%) published SRs. Several editors regarded the use of Cochrane methodology or a meta-analysis as quality criteria; for some respondents these criteria were premises for the consideration of SRs as original research. Journals placed SRs in various sections such as "Review" or "Feature article". Characterization of non-responding journals showed that about two thirds do publish systematic reviews.¦DISCUSSION: Currently, the editors of most core clinical journals consider SRs original research. Our findings are limited by a non-responder rate of 45%. Individual comments suggest that this is a grey area and attitudes differ widely. A debate about the definition of 'original research' in the context of SRs is warranted.

Positive Outcomes Influence the Rate and Time to Publication, but Not the Impact Factor of Publications of Clinical Trial Results

Objectives: Publication bias may affect the validity of evidence based medical decisions. The aim of this study is to assess whether research outcomes affect the dissemination of clinical trial findings, in terms of rate, time to publication, and impact factor of journal publications. Methods and Findings: All drug-evaluating clinical trials submitted to and approved by a general hospital ethics committee between 1997 and 2004 were prospectively followed to analyze their fate and publication. Published articles were identified by searching Pubmed and other electronic databases. Clinical study final reports submitted to the ethics committee, final reports synopses available online and meeting abstracts were also considered as sources of study results. Study outcomes were classified as positive (when statistical significance favoring experimental drug was achieved), negative (when no statistical significance was achieved or it favored control drug) and descriptive (for non-controlled studies). Time to publication was defined as time from study closure to publication. A survival analysis was performed using a Cox regression model to analyze time to publication. Journal impact factors of identified publications were recorded. Publication rate was 48·4% (380/785). Study results were identified for 68·9% of all completed clinical trials (541/785). Publication rate was 84·9% (180/212) for studies with results classified as positive and 68·9% (128/186) for studies with results classified as negative (p<0·001). Median time to publication was 2·09 years (IC95 1·61-2·56) for studies with results classified as positive and 3·21 years (IC95 2·69-3·70) for studies with results classified as negative (hazard ratio 1·99 (IC95 1·55-2·55). No differences were found in publication impact factor between positive (median 6·308, interquartile range: 3·141-28·409) and negative result studies (median 8·266, interquartile range: 4·135-17·157). Conclusions: Clinical trials with positive outcomes have significantly higher rates and shorter times to publication than those with negative results. However, no differences have been found in terms of impact factor.