Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Contributions of the comic strips on scientific articles
  Beom Sun Chung, Min Suk Chung
  Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 92.     CrossRef

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information
  Jeong-Wook Seo, Hosik Chung, Tae-Sul Seo, Youngim Jung, Eun Seong Hwang, Cheol-Heui Yun, Hyungsun Kim
  Science Editing.2017; 4(2): 58.     CrossRef

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

It is a time of great innovation in peer review. Traditional models are being adapted and completely new ones introduced. Independent peer-review services are also starting to be offered by organizations outside the traditional journal ecosphere. In both new and established systems, the importance of increasing openness, transparency, and interaction between peer-review participants is being recognized, and these are being introduced to varying degrees. Concern with the ‘wastage’ of review effort in traditional peer review, where manuscripts often go from journal to journal, being reviewed afresh at each, before being accepted for publication, is also being addressed. Reviews are being transferred (‘cascaded’) and shared between some journals. The separation of the two basic functions of peer review—critical review and selection—as originally introduced by the journal PLOS ONE has been a major innovation, leading to the publication of sound work irrespective of its perceived novelty, interest, or importance. Post-publication review is also becoming more important and is another growth area. The concept of ‘portable’ reviews has been introduced, where authors can take reviews with them—either after they have obtained them from a peer-review provider in return for a fee or had their manuscript reviewed and declined at some journals—and include them with submissions to journals. The dynamics of publication are changing alongside, with journals able to ‘bid’ for papers that have been reviewed by independent organizations and make publishing offers to the authors. A number of innovations and ‘alternative’ peer-review models are described. They all, however, face many of the same issues as traditional peer review, and the same basic principles of good and ethical practice apply.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Experience with “Select Crowd Review” in Peer Review for The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon: 1-Year Experience
  Roman Gottardi, Peter Thomas Henning, Jessica Bogensberger, Markus K. Heinemann
  The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon.2023; 71(08): 609.     CrossRef
• Journal Peer Review and Editorial Evaluation: Cautious Innovator or Sleepy Giant?
  Serge P. J. M. Horbach, Willem Halffman
  Minerva.2020; 58(2): 139.     CrossRef
• The relationship of polarity of post-publication peer review to citation count
  Qianjin Zong, Lili Fan, Yafen Xie, Jingshi Huang
  Online Information Review.2020; 44(3): 583.     CrossRef
• Innovative Strategies for Peer Review
  Edward Barroga
  Journal of Korean Medical Science.2020;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Transparent Attribution of Contributions to Research: Aligning Guidelines to Real-Life Practices
  Valerie Matarese, Karen Shashok
  Publications.2019; 7(2): 24.     CrossRef
• The changing forms and expectations of peer review
  S. P. J. M. Horbach, W. ( Willem) Halffman
  Research Integrity and Peer Review.2018;[Epub]     CrossRef
• What is open peer review? A systematic review
  Tony Ross-Hellauer
  F1000Research.2017; 6: 588.     CrossRef
• What is open peer review? A systematic review
  Tony Ross-Hellauer
  F1000Research.2017; 6: 588.     CrossRef
• Peer‐review warning: system error, reviewers not found
  Lluís Brotons
  Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.2015; 13(5): 241.     CrossRef
• Does ‘get visible or vanish’ herald the end of ‘publish or perish’?
  Joanne Doyle, Michael Cuthill
  Higher Education Research & Development.2015; 34(3): 671.     CrossRef
• Emerging trends in peer review—a survey
  Richard Walker, Pascal Rocha da Silva
  Frontiers in Neuroscience.2015;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Journal Metrics-Based Position ofDiabetes & Metabolism Journalafter the Change of Its Text Language to English
  Sun Huh
  Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2014; 38(3): 187.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef

CrossRef (http://www.crossref.org) is a not-for-profit membership association of publishers. Since its founding in 2000, CrossRef has provided reference linking services for over 62 million scholarly content items, including journal articles, books and book chapters, conference proceedings, reference entries, technical reports, standards, and data sets. CrossRef also provides additional collaborative services designed to improve trust in the scholarly communications process, including Cited-By linking, CrossCheck plagiarism screening, CrossMark update identification, and the FundRef funder identification service. All of these services continue to develop to try to meet the evolving needs of publishers, and this article attempts to give an overview of them and highlight important updates which have taken place over the last 12 months.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• The availability and completeness of open funder metadata: Case study for publications funded by the Dutch Research Council
  Bianca Kramer, Hans de Jonge
  Quantitative Science Studies.2022; 3(3): 583.     CrossRef
• How many preprints have actually been printed and why: a case study of computer science preprints on arXiv
  Jialiang Lin, Yao Yu, Yu Zhou, Zhiyang Zhou, Xiaodong Shi
  Scientometrics.2020; 124(1): 555.     CrossRef
• Acesso aberto a artigos, dados e materiais de pesquisa na RBMFC
  Leonardo Ferreira Fontenelle, Thiago Dias Sarti
  Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade.2020; 15(42): 2671.     CrossRef
• Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature
  Daniel S Himmelstein, Ariel Rodriguez Romero, Jacob G Levernier, Thomas Anthony Munro, Stephen Reid McLaughlin, Bastian Greshake Tzovaras, Casey S Greene
  eLife.2018;[Epub]     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
• 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
• Status of digital standards in Korean medical journals in 2016
  Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2016; 3(2): 100.     CrossRef
• Using the Crossref Metadata API to explore publisher content
  Rachael Lammey
  Science Editing.2016; 3(2): 109.     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
• Scientific and academic journals in the Philippines: status and challenges
  Evelyn Mae Tecson-Mendoza
  Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 73.     CrossRef
• Opinions of Korean science editors on open access policies, editorial difficulties, and government’s support for publishing
  Sun Huh, Hye-Min Cho, Hyungsun Kim
  Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 55.     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
• Application of new information technologies to scholarly journals: ORCID, CrossMark, and FundRef
  Sun Huh
  Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2014; 57(5): 455.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef
• Journal Metrics-Based Position ofDiabetes & Metabolism Journalafter the Change of Its Text Language to English
  Sun Huh
  Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2014; 38(3): 187.     CrossRef
• Journal Article Tag Suite 1.0: National Information Standards Organization standard of journal extensible markup language
  Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 99.     CrossRef
• How Journal Metrics Illustrate the Transformation of Archives of Plastic Surgery into an International Journal
  Sun Huh
  Archives of Plastic Surgery.2014; 41(06): 617.     CrossRef
• What is the position ofClinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicinein its scholarly journal network based on journal metrics?
  Sun Huh
  Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine.2014; 41(4): 147.     CrossRef

The Republic of Korea is the fourth ranking country for the number of PubMed Central (PMC) journals. As of September 2013, 75 journals from Korea are included in PMC. Starting in 2013, several research funding agencies for scholarly journal publications in Korea began to establish open access, full-text databases in the fields of medicine, science, and social sciences and humanities. In those databases, Journal Article Tag Suite (JATS) 1.0 is used so that articles written in the Korean language can be easily manipulated as full-text extensible markup language (XML). Editors or publishers must produce full-text XML files based on JATS 1.0. Thus this paper surveys the current state of the application of JATS 1.0 to Korean scholarly journals, including both those in English and those in Korean, focusing on the current technology, training programs, and the policy of the Korean government on open access, full-text XML. This experience in Korea can be a model for constructing mother-tongue, open access, full-text journal databases based on JATS 1.0 in other countries. The usefulness of JATS in scholarly journal publications not only of all fields, but also in all languages, is stressed.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Improving Publication Pipeline with Automated Biological Entity Detection and Validation Service
  Weijia Xu, Amit Gupta, Pankaj Jaiswal, Crispin Taylor, Patti Lockhart, Jennifer Regala
  Data and Information Management.2019; 3(1): 3.     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
• Opinions of Korean science editors on open access policies, editorial difficulties, and government’s support for publishing
  Sun Huh, Hye-Min Cho, Hyungsun Kim
  Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 55.     CrossRef
• Journal Metrics-Based Position ofDiabetes & Metabolism Journalafter the Change of Its Text Language to English
  Sun Huh
  Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2014; 38(3): 187.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef
• Application of new information technologies to scholarly journals: ORCID, CrossMark, and FundRef
  Sun Huh
  Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2014; 57(5): 455.     CrossRef
• Coding practice of the Journal Article Tag Suite extensible markup language
  Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 105.     CrossRef
• Journal Article Tag Suite 1.0: National Information Standards Organization standard of journal extensible markup language
  Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 99.     CrossRef
• How Journal Metrics Illustrate the Transformation of Archives of Plastic Surgery into an International Journal
  Sun Huh
  Archives of Plastic Surgery.2014; 41(06): 617.     CrossRef

We hypothesized that it is not open access status but rather exposure in the PubMed platform that affects citation frequency in medical journals. In November 2008, medical journals from Korea began to be added to PubMed Central (PMC). Therefore, it would be interesting to know whether or not their impact factor based on Web of Science has increased since the journals were listed in PMC/PubMed. To answer this question, a citation analysis of seven journals that have been indexed in PMC since 2008 or 2009 was done. Only non-Medline journals were selected and the impact factors of five Medline journals were compared. The impact factor was calculated via Web of Science. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) data were used if the data of the target journals were provided in JCR. Trends for the impact factors of different years were analyzed using dBSTAT ver. 5.0. There has been an increasing rates of the impact factor for the seven non-Medline journals, 1.92 in 2011 over 2010; 3.27 in 2010 over 2009; 1.12 in 2012 over 2011. As for the five Medline journals, the increasing rate in 2010 over 2009 was 1.18; however, those of 2011 over 2010 and 2012 over 2011 were 1.01 and 1.04 respectively. The Science Citation Index Expanded impact factor of medical journals published in Korea can be increased if those journals are published in English and listed in PMC. This is an effect of the platform in which the journals are listed and not just an effect of free access.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• 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
• Evidence-based recommendations for increasing the citation frequency of original articles
  Nicole Heßler, Andreas Ziegler
  Scientometrics.2022; 127(6): 3367.     CrossRef
• Suggestions for Exercise Science’s Promotion to a Top-Tier Journal in the Category of Sports Science
  Sun Huh
  Exercise Science.2022; 31(3): 279.     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
• PubMed Central as a platform for the survival of open-access biomedical society journals published in Korea
  Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2021; 8(2): 153.     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
• 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
• Development Status of the Korean Journal of Child Studies 4 Years After the Suggestions made in 2016
  Sun Huh
  Korean Journal of Child Studies.2020; 41(6): 1.     CrossRef
• Status of digital standards, licensing types, and archiving policies in Asian open access journals registered in Directory of Open Access Journals
  Soon Kim, Hyungwook Choi
  Science Editing.2019; 6(1): 41.     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
• The great rise ofIntestinal Researchas an international journal 3 years after its language change to English as evidenced by journal metrics
  Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
  Intestinal Research.2017; 15(1): 1.     CrossRef
• The rapid internationalization of Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism as evidenced by journal metrics
  Sun Huh
  Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism.2017; 22(2): 77.     CrossRef
• Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research's promotion to internationally competitive journal evidenced by journal metrics
  Sun Huh
  Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research.2017; 6(2): 67.     CrossRef
• Promotion ofNeurointerventionto International Journal Based on Journal Metrics
  Sun Huh
  Neurointervention.2016; 11(1): 5.     CrossRef
• Promotion to MEDLINE, indexing with Medical Subject Headings, and open data policy for the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
  Sun Huh
  Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2016; 13: 14.     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
• 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 to Promote the Korean Journal of Child Studies to an International Journal
  Sun Huh
  Korean Journal of Child Studies.2016; 37(1): 7.     CrossRef
• Analysis of the suitability of the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies journal evaluation tool
  Geum‐Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
  Learned Publishing.2016; 29(3): 193.     CrossRef
• Current status of Science Citation Index Expanded listing of Korean medical journals and effect of PubMed electronic publication ahead of print to their impact factors
  Jae Jun Shim, Byung-Ho Kim
  Science Editing.2016; 3(2): 94.     CrossRef
• Status of digital standards in Korean medical journals in 2016
  Geum Hee Jeong, Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2016; 3(2): 100.     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
• Scientific and academic journals in the Philippines: status and challenges
  Evelyn Mae Tecson-Mendoza
  Science Editing.2015; 2(2): 73.     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
• Journal Metrics-Based Position ofDiabetes & Metabolism Journalafter the Change of Its Text Language to English
  Sun Huh
  Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2014; 38(3): 187.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef
• Application of new information technologies to scholarly journals: ORCID, CrossMark, and FundRef
  Sun Huh
  Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2014; 57(5): 455.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef
• The basics of CrossRef extensible markup language
  Rachael Lammey
  Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 76.     CrossRef
• Journal Article Tag Suite 1.0: National Information Standards Organization standard of journal extensible markup language
  Sun Huh
  Science Editing.2014; 1(2): 99.     CrossRef
• How Journal Metrics Illustrate the Transformation of Archives of Plastic Surgery into an International Journal
  Sun Huh
  Archives of Plastic Surgery.2014; 41(06): 617.     CrossRef
• What is the position ofClinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicinein its scholarly journal network based on journal metrics?
  Sun Huh
  Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine.2014; 41(4): 147.     CrossRef

We would like to verify the correlation among various citation indicators of 62 Korean scientific journals listed in the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. From a total of 85 Korean journals listed in both WoS as of January 2013, and 132 journals listed in Scopus as of 2011, 62 Korean journals listed in both citation indices were selected for analysis. Citation index indicators selected for analysis include impact factor (IF), 5-year impact factor (5yrIF), Eigenfactor score (EF), article influence score (AIS) (list of WoS indicators), SCImago journal rank (SJR), h-index, and impact index (ImIndex) (list of Scopus indicators). It took an average of eight years for a newly founded journal to be listed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). Since the IF, ImIndex, and AIS values failed to exceed 1.0, Korean journals’ popularity and prestige were confirmed to be minimal. Analyzed journals that were written in English exhibited higher SJR and h-index values than ones written in Korean. WoS’ IF exhibited a correlation with WoS’ 5yrIF, EF, AIS, and Scopus’ SJR, h-index, and ImIndex. Since the ‘popularity and prestige of Korean journals’ have been confirmed to be minimal, steps must be taken to improve this status. Popularity-based indicators have been shown to strongly correlate with prestige-based indicators in Korean science journals. Therefore, there must be a strategic approach taken to improve IF values.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Evolution of the intellectual structure of clothing and textiles literature
  Joon-Ho Seon, Seong Eun Kim, Hyun-Jung Lee, Kyu-Hye Lee
  The Research Journal of the Costume Culture.2019; 27(4): 299.     CrossRef
• Healthcare Informatics Research's Journey of Paving the Road to Excellence in Global Healthcare Informatics
  Mona Choi, Jung A Kim
  Healthcare Informatics Research.2018; 24(2): 95.     CrossRef
• A Step Forward for KABC
  Hyejung Chang, Kim Jung A
  Business Communication Research and Practice.2018; 1(1): 1.     CrossRef
• Citation Analysis for Biomedical and Health Sciences Journals Published in Korea
  Juyeon Oh, Hyejung Chang, Jung A Kim, Mona Choi, Ziyoung Park, Yoonhee Cho, Eun-gyu Lee
  Healthcare Informatics Research.2017; 23(3): 218.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef

This work aims to develop a paper authoring support system that helps biomedical scientists to organize their ideas for a specific discourse purpose. As an initial step toward the goal, this study developed an abstract authoring support tool that provides candidate lexical bundles organized according to the introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure. Lexical bundles were extracted from the sentences in 152,083 structured abstracts of the PubMed Central open access subset and their distribution was analyzed by IMRAD section. To organize lexical bundles according to IMRAD, the Lexical Bundle Ontology was built. A Journal Article Tag Suite compliant authoring support tool was implemented. This tool lists candidate lexical bundles corresponding to authors’ discourse purposes in a specific section and thereby helps to complete sentences. We expect this tool be useful, at least in biomedical abstract writing, to organize an author’s ideas to achieve a specific discourse purpose. This tool is targeted primarily at biomedical scientists whose mother tongue is not English; however, English native speakers may find it useful as well.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Structuralizing biomedical abstracts with discriminative linguistic features
  Sejin Nam, Senator Jeong, Sang-Kyun Kim, Hong-Gee Kim, Victoria Ngo, Nansu Zong
  Computers in Biology and Medicine.2016; 79: 276.     CrossRef
• Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age
  Kihong Kim
  Science Editing.2014; 1(1): 2.     CrossRef

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• 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
• Comparing the Areas of Interest in the Field of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorder and Neurogastroenterology and Motility Between the East and the West
  Ju Yup Lee, Nayoung Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Gi Hyun Kim
  Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility.2015; 21(4): 503.     CrossRef
• Journal Metrics-Based Position ofDiabetes & Metabolism Journalafter the Change of Its Text Language to English
  Sun Huh
  Diabetes & Metabolism Journal.2014; 38(3): 187.     CrossRef
• How Far Has theInternational Neurourology JournalProgressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal?
  Sun Huh
  International Neurourology Journal.2014; 18(1): 3.     CrossRef
• How Journal Metrics Illustrate the Transformation of Archives of Plastic Surgery into an International Journal
  Sun Huh
  Archives of Plastic Surgery.2014; 41(06): 617.     CrossRef