Science Editing

Review

Artificial intelligence-assisted tools for redefining the communication landscape of the scholarly world: Habeeb Ibrahim Abdul Razack, Sam T. Mathew, Fathinul Fikri Ahmad Saad, Saleh A. Alqahtani; Sci Ed. 2021;8(2):134-144. Published online July 27, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.244

18,124 View
628 Download
12 Web of Science
12 Crossref

The flood of research output and increasing demands for peer reviewers have necessitated the intervention of artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. Although human input is seen as essential for writing publications, the contribution of AI slowly and steadily moves ahead. AI may redefine the role of science communication experts in the future and transform the scholarly publishing industry into a technology-driven one. It can prospectively improve the quality of publishable content and identify errors in published content. In this article, we review various AI and other associated tools currently in use or development for a range of publishing obligations and functions that have brought about or can soon leverage much-demanded advances in scholarly communications. Several AI-assisted tools, with diverse scope and scale, have emerged in the scholarly market. AI algorithms develop summaries of scientific publications and convert them into plain-language texts, press statements, and news stories. Retrieval of accurate and sufficient information is prominent in evidence-based science publications. Semantic tools may empower transparent and proficient data extraction tactics. From detecting simple plagiarism errors to predicting the projected citation impact of an unpublished article, AI’s role in scholarly publishing is expected to be multidimensional. AI, natural language processing, and machine learning in scholarly publishing have arrived for writers, editors, authors, and publishers. They should leverage these technologies to enable the fast and accurate dissemination of scientific information to contribute to the betterment of humankind.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Navigating the impact: a study of editors’ and proofreaders’ perceptions of AI tools in editing and proofreading
Islam Al Sawi, Ahmed Alaa
Discover Artificial Intelligence.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Beyond Plagiarism: ChatGPT as the Vanguard of Technological Revolution in Research and Citation
Hanni B. Flaherty, Jackson Yurch
Research on Social Work Practice.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted medical writing: With greater power comes greater responsibility
Rhythm Bains
Asian Journal of Oral Health and Allied Sciences.2023; 13: 2. CrossRef
Emergence of the metaverse and ChatGPT in journal publishing after the COVID-19 pandemic
Sun Huh
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
Author-Profile-Based Journal Recommendation for a Candidate Article: Using Hybrid Semantic Similarity and Trend Analysis
Mehmet Yașar Bayraktar, Mehmet Kaya
IEEE Access.2023; 11: 45826. CrossRef
Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing class: How do Indonesian students perceive?
Santi Pratiwi Tri Utami, Andayani Andayani, Retno Winarni, Sumarwati Sumarwati
Contemporary Educational Technology.2023; 15(4): ep450. CrossRef
The impact of generative AI tools on researchers and research: Implications for academia in higher education
Abdulrahman M. Al-Zahrani
Innovations in Education and Teaching International.2023; : 1. CrossRef
Slow Writing with ChatGPT: Turning the Hype into a Right Way Forward
Chitnarong Sirisathitkul
Postdigital Science and Education.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Editorial policies of Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions on the use of generative artificial intelligence in article writing and peer review
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 40. CrossRef
Current Status of Neurointervention, the Official Journal of the Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology
Dae Chul Suh, Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2022; 17(2): 67. CrossRef
Profiles of Technology Use and Plagiarism in High School Education
Juan Carlos Torres-Diaz, Pablo Vicente Torres Carrión, Isidro Marín Gutierrez
SSRN Electronic Journal .2021;[Epub] CrossRef

Original Articles

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports: Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(1):24-33. Published online February 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.186

5,937 View
133 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: The “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” are of increasing importance in an open science environment as a way to increase the transparency and quality of academic society journals. However, little previous research has investigated the application of this new guideline in practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree to which this guideline is being applied by Korean academic society– published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports.
Methods
The researchers investigated the homepages of 59 Korean academic society– published journals to evaluate whether they had adopted the 33 items listed in the guideline. Based on the information available on the journals’ homepages, each item was classified as ‘yes’ or ‘no’ within the four categories of basic journal information, publication ethics, copyright and archiving information, and profit model.
Results
The basic journal information category was generally well-practiced, with the exceptions of the peer review process, readership, and author fees. The copyright and licensing information category was also well-practiced, with the exception of policies on posting accepted articles with third parties and archiving items. However, most items in the publication ethics category were not well practiced, with the exception of authorship and intellectual property. All items in the profit model category were infrequently implemented.
Conclusion
These findings serve as a good indicator for Korean journal editors of areas for improvement. It may be helpful to review journals’ publication policies and homepages to comply with international publishing standards.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The Application of Open Science Potentials in Research Processes: A Comprehensive Literature Review
Maryam Zarghani, Leila Nemati-Anaraki, Shahram Sedghi, Abdolreza Noroozi Chakoli, Anisa Rowhani-Farid
Libri.2023; 73(2): 167. CrossRef
Promotion to Top-Tier Journal and Development Strategy of the Annals of Laboratory Medicine for Strengthening its Leadership in the Medical Laboratory Technology Category: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Annals of Laboratory Medicine.2022; 42(3): 321. CrossRef
Congratulations on Child Health Nursing Research becoming a PubMed Central journal and reflections on its significance
Sun Huh
Child Health Nursing Research.2022; 28(1): 1. CrossRef
Marking the inclusion of the Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing in PubMed Central and strategies to be promoted to a top-tier journal in the nursing category
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing.2022; 28(3): 165. CrossRef
Document Network and Conceptual and Social Structures of Clinical Endoscopy from 2015 to July 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 641. CrossRef
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. CrossRef

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals: Hyung Wook Choi, Ye Jin Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):112-121. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.171

6,244 View
126 Download
10 Web of Science
13 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: Four international associations, including the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Committee on Publication Ethics, and the World Association of Medical Editors declared the third version of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” to ensure transparency and quality in journal publications. This study is aimed at assessing the guidelines from the journals’ websites manually.
Methods
In this study, three researchers investigate the homepages of 781 academic society-published journals that are registered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and whether these journals are effectively adopting these new guidelines. In this paper, 33 items from the guidelines are examined. The 33 items are rearranged into four different categories: basic journal information; publication ethics; copyright and archiving information; and profit model. The researchers count yes or no after checking the adopting status on the journal homepage and dividing into four scales: 0% to 25% for is rarely practiced, 26% to 50% for is poorly practiced, 51% to 75% for is adequately practiced, and 76% to 100% for is well practiced.
Results
Of the 33 items, 10 are found to be poorly or rarely practiced, including readership, data sharing, archiving policies, and profit model information.
Conclusion
It could be the most up-to-date indicator of the current status of applying best practice guidelines. Society journal editors especially from Asia should evaluate their journals regarding “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing”.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Opening up to the open data
Prakash K. Dubey
Journal of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences.2024; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
Prestige of scholarly book publishers—An investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries
Eleonora Dagienė
Research Evaluation.2023; 32(2): 356. CrossRef
The use of data repositories in dermatology
Umer Nadir, Loma Dave, Michael D. Yi, Farhana Ikmal Hisham, Murad Alam
Archives of Dermatological Research.2023; 315(6): 1851. CrossRef
Promotion to Top-Tier Journal and Development Strategy of the Annals of Laboratory Medicine for Strengthening its Leadership in the Medical Laboratory Technology Category: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Annals of Laboratory Medicine.2022; 42(3): 321. CrossRef
Cumplimiento de Estándares Internacionales en Publicaciones Arbitradas Académicas Mexicanas y Guatemaltecas
Humberto Emilio Aguilera Arévalo
Revista Académica Sociedad del Conocimiento Cunzac.2022; 2(1): 89. CrossRef
Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals
Brian Jackson
Publications.2021; 9(2): 25. CrossRef
Document Network and Conceptual and Social Structures of Clinical Endoscopy from 2015 to July 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 641. CrossRef
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
Changes in bibliographic information associated with Korean scientific journals from 2011 to 2019
Yoon Joo Seo, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 11. CrossRef
Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports
Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 24. CrossRef
Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal
Sun Huh
Ultrasonography.2020; 39(3): 238. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. CrossRef
Recent trends in medical journals’ data sharing policies and statements of data availability
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(06): 493. CrossRef

Comparative analysis of manuscript management systems for scholarly publishing: Soon Kim, Hyungwook Choi, Nayon Kim, EunKyung Chung, Jae Yun Lee; Sci Ed. 2018;5(2):124-134. Published online August 20, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.137

20,547 View
356 Download
7 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF

To improve scholarly communications with scientists throughout the world, an international-level manuscript management system is indispensable. We analyzed the manuscript management systems currently in use in Korea and suggested ways to improve these domestic systems through benchmarking with representative overseas systems. Drawing information from the manufacturer’s documentation, we compared the functionalities of the major manuscript management systems available in Korea to international systems. Based on this analysis, we identified the essential elements necessary to meet international standards. The representative international systems provide an intuitive interface and an efficient communication channel for authors, editors, and reviewers, enabling them to save time. The two domestic paid systems are almost at the international level; however, the free systems developed in Korea need to be upgraded. In particular, more advanced visualization tools, more efficient tools for communication between stakeholders, and convenient linking to external content are needed. Studies of these manuscript management systems, which are essential for the internationalization of domestic journals, can be utilized as primary materials to improve the level of Korean academic journals in response to the rapid changes in modern scholarly communication.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review
Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall
Learned Publishing.2024; 37(1): 4. CrossRef
Should publishers use online submission systems to harvest authors’ responses to diversity, equity and inclusion?
J. A. Teixeira da Silva
Science Editor and Publisher.2023; 7(2): 210. CrossRef
An Exploratory Study into Professional Scholarly Journals Publishing Software Adoption in Lithuania
Vincas Grigas, Arūnas Gudinavičius, Tomas Petreikis, Andrius Šuminas
Information & Media.2023; 96: 179. CrossRef
A Blockchain-Based Editorial Management System
Eman-Yaser Daraghmi, Mamoun Abu Helou, Yousef-Awwad Daraghmi, omar cheikhrouhou
Security and Communication Networks.2021; 2021: 1. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted tools for redefining the communication landscape of the scholarly world
Habeeb Ibrahim Abdul Razack, Sam T. Mathew, Fathinul Fikri Ahmad Saad, Saleh A. Alqahtani
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 134. CrossRef
The “invisible hand” of peer review: The implications of author-referee networks on peer review in a scholarly journal
Pierpaolo Dondio, Niccolò Casnici, Francisco Grimaldo, Nigel Gilbert, Flaminio Squazzoni
Journal of Informetrics.2019; 13(2): 708. CrossRef

Review

Latest trends in innovative global scholarly journal publication and distribution platforms: Soon Kim, Eunkyung Chung, Jae Yun Lee; Sci Ed. 2018;5(2):100-112. Published online August 20, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.133

16,356 View
235 Download
3 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Abstract PDF

This review article presents the latest trends in innovative global scholarly journal publication and distribution platforms, with implications for local journals. Changes have taken place in distribution policies, as pre-publication distribution has become a viable option, and for post-publication distribution, public access or mandatory open access policies have been introduced for articles supported by public or governmental funds. New formats of articles include graphical abstracts, interactive PDFs, the application of semantic enhancements, and the utilization of research data, social networking sites, such as Mendeley and ResearchGate, have become common sites for information exchange. Altmetrics have been adopted to complement traditional journal metrics. PubMed Central, F1000Research, KoreaMed Synapse, and ScienceCentral have been introduced as innovative full-text scholarly journal distribution systems. To publish web-based scholarly journals, it is necessary to adopt an open platform and to explore options such as an author profile database, an online collaborative editing module, and Crossref text and data mining services. To maximize the influence of local journals, it is necessary to integrate various external tools, such as researcher ID, research data, social media, and altmetrics services.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Korean researchers’ motivations for publishing in data journals and the usefulness of their data: a qualitative study
Jungyeoun Lee, Jihyun Kim
Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 145. CrossRef
Is it possible to foster first-rate publishers through a journal publishing cooperative in Korea?
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(01): 3. CrossRef

Original Article

Topics of major current interest in scholarly editing and publishing based on the content analysis of selected journals: Yeonok Chung; Sci Ed. 2015;2(2):59-62. Published online August 14, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.45

15,513 View
102 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Crossref

Abstract PDF

For the purpose of obtaining a concrete picture of the main issues related to modern scholarly editing and publishing, a content analysis of the recent issues of three international journals devoted to scholarly editing and publishing, which are Learned Publishing, Journal of Scholarly Publishing, and European Science Editing, has been performed. The main topics in each of the 273 articles published in those journals over recent three years have been identified and classified into broad categories. The result has shown that the two most popular topics are open access publishing and peer review process. Other non-traditional topics currently receiving a great attention include bibliometrics, publication ethics, information technology applicable to editing and publishing, digital publishing, and literature databases. In order to keep up with the rapidly-developing field of scholarly editing and publishing and develop a local journal into an international journal of a high standard, it is important to remain keen to the latest development related to these topics.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Forecast of the Development of Russian Scientific Journals: The Publishers
O. V. Moskaleva, M. A. Akoev
Scholarly Research and Information.2020; 3(2-3): 131. CrossRef

Training Material

Applying Open Researchers and Contributors ID in scholarly journals: Jeonghee Im; Sci Ed. 2015;2(1):28-31. Published online February 28, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.33

14,192 View
124 Download
16 Web of Science
16 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Open Researchers and Contributors ID (ORCID) launched its registry services in October 2012. Consequently, adding personal information to the ORCID registry became routine work for researchers. To add ORCID to an online article, the tag < contrib-id contrib-id-type = “orcid” > needs to be included in the Journal Article Tag Suite extensible markup language file, if such a file has been produced by the publisher. Subsequently, all co-authors’ ORCID can be easily and conveniently collected and then integrated into the manuscript management system. In the current age of information and the Internet, journals need to keep pace with the surge of new standards and technologies. Editors should be able to accept and apply these new systems rapidly.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal
Sun Huh
Ultrasonography.2020; 39(3): 238. CrossRef
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions will be accepted for inclusion in Scopus
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2019; 16: 2. CrossRef
Endocrinology and Metabolism Has Been Indexed in MEDLINE: A Major Achievement
Won-Young Lee
Endocrinology and Metabolism.2019; 34(2): 138. CrossRef
Journal metrics of Clinical and Molecular Hepatology based on the Web of Science Core Collection
Sun Huh
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2018; 24(2): 137. CrossRef
How much progress has Blood Research made since the change of the journal title in 2013
Sun Huh
Blood Research.2018; 53(2): 95. CrossRef
Recent advances of medical journals in Korea and and further development strategies: Is it possible for them to publish Nobel Prize-winning research?
Sun Huh
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2018; 61(9): 524. CrossRef
Endocrinology and Metabolism Is Indexed in the Emerging Sources Citation Index
Won-Young Lee
Endocrinology and Metabolism.2017; 32(3): 350. CrossRef
How to PrepareEndocrinology and Metabolismfor Reapplication to MEDLINE
Sun Huh
Endocrinology and Metabolism.2017; 32(1): 58. CrossRef
Promotion ofNeurointerventionto International Journal Based on Journal Metrics
Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2016; 11(1): 5. CrossRef
Journal of Gastric Cancer's Promotion to International Journal from the Perspective of Biliometric Analysis
Sun Huh
Journal of Gastric Cancer.2016; 16(1): 8. CrossRef
Status of digital standards in Korean medical journals in 2016
Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2016; 3(2): 100. CrossRef
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery's Evolution into an International Journal Based on Journal Metrics
Sun Huh
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery.2016; 8(2): 127. CrossRef
How much progress has been made in journal metrics two years after the citation analysis of theKorean Journal of Urology?
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Urology.2015; 56(4): 276. CrossRef
Evidence of the Internationalization ofClinical EndoscopyBased on Journal Metrics
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2015; 48(4): 317. CrossRef
The Elevation ofAnnals of Rehabilitation Medicineto the Status of an International Journal After Adopting an English-Only Policy
Sun Huh
Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine.2015; 39(5): 661. CrossRef
How much is Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions promoted based on journal metrics?
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2015; 12: 57. CrossRef

Review

Peer review at the beginning of the 21st century: Irene Hames; Sci Ed. 2014;1(1):4-8. Published online February 13, 2014; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.2014.1.4

21,575 View
157 Download
4 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Vigorous debate currently surrounds peer review, and polarized views are often expressed. Despite criticisms about the process, studies have found that it is still valued by researchers, with rigorous peer review being rated by authors as the most important service they expect to receive when paying to have their papers published open access. The expectations of peer review and what it can achieve need, however, to be realistic. Peer review is also only as good and effective as the people managing the process, and the large variation in standards that exists is one of the reasons some of the research and related communities have become critical of and disillusioned with the traditional model of peer review. The role of the editor is critical. All editors must act as proper editors, not just moving manuscripts automatically through the various stages, but making critical judgements throughout the process to reach sound and unbiased editorial decisions. New models and innovations in peer review are appearing. Many issues, however, remain the same: rigorous procedures and high ethical standards should be in place, those responsible for making decisions and managing the process need to be trained to equip them for their roles and responsibilities, and systems need to be adapted to deal with new challenges such as the increasing amounts of data being generated and needing to be taken into account when assessing the validity and soundness of work and the conclusions being drawn.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The challenge of recruiting peer reviewers from one medical journal’s perspective
Christopher J. Peterson, Cynthia Orticio, Kenneth Nugent
Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings.2022; 35(3): 394. CrossRef
Effective Peer Review: Who, Where, or What?
Russell P. Hall
JID Innovations.2022; 2(6): 100162. CrossRef
JID Innovations and Peer Review
Russell P. Hall
JID Innovations.2021; 1(3): 100056. CrossRef
Enhancing reproducibility: Failures from Reproducibility Initiatives underline core challenges
Kevin Mullane, Michael Williams
Biochemical Pharmacology.2017; 138: 7. CrossRef
Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers
Tony Ross-Hellauer, Arvid Deppe, Birgit Schmidt, Jelte M. Wicherts
PLOS ONE.2017; 12(12): e0189311. CrossRef
Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
Kihong Kim
Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2. CrossRef
The big picture: scholarly publishing trends 2014
Pippa Smart
Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 52. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search