Search

الملخص: عادة ما تكون المقالات ما قبل الطباعة بمثابة مقدمة أولية لأوراق تمت مراجعتها من قِبل النظراء ويتم وضعها على الفور تقريبا، باستثناء بعض الفحص السطحي، في مستودع وصول مفتوح للجمهور للسماح للمعلومات بالوصول إلى القراء بسرعة، والتغلب على الخمول المرتبط عادة بالمعالجة بطريقة المجلات التي تعتمد على مراجعة الأقران. بالنسبة للباحثين في بداية حياتهم المهنية الذين قد يكونون متحمسين للحصول على بعض التقدير لجهودهم، أو الرغبة في الحصول على مدخلات مفتوحة وعلنية حول عملهم، فإن النشر قبل الطباعة هو بالتأكيد خيار نشر مفيد. ومع ذلك، إذا لم يتم فحص البيانات والمعلومات المتعلقة بالصحة بعناية، فقد تشكل خطرا، وقد تعمل أيضا كمصدر لمعلومات مضللة عن الصحة العامة. تشير زيادة النمو والمنافسة بين خوادم ما قبل الطباعة، إلى جانب حجم هائل من المطبوعات المسبقة المتعلقة بـ كوفيد-١٩، وخاصة على خادم ما قبل الطباعة لعلم الأحياء، وخادم ما قبل الطباعة للعلوم الطبية، بالإضافة إلى تحديد الفهرسة التي يتم اختبارها الآن على موقع بوب ميد، إلى أن المطبوعات المسبقة يتم استخدامها بشكل متزايد في العلوم الطبية الحيوية. وهناك حاجة إلى سياسات أخلاقية أقوى وأكثر قوة لفحص المطبوعات المسبقة قبل نشرها للجمهور، وحتى إذا كان هذا يعني تأخيرا طفيفا في النشر، فقد يؤدي ذلك إلى زيادة ثقة الأكاديميين في هذا الشكل من المعلومات العلمية والتواصل. يجب تقديم سياسات أخلاقية واضحة وصارمة بشكل عاجل من قبل مجموعات الأخلاقيات مثل لجنة أخلاقيات النشر، واللجنة الدولية لمحرري المجلات الطبية للمجلات الأعضاء التي تسمح بنشر مقالات ما قبل الطباعة قبل مراجعة النظراء التقليدية. ستفيد الإرشادات الأخلاقية الصارمة التي تتعامل مع سوء السلوك على قدم المساواة في مقالات ما قبل الطباعة والأبحاث التي راجعها النظراء، ستفيد نزاهة النشر الأكاديمي. Abstract: Preprints are typically crude precursors of peer-reviewed papers that are placed almost immediately, save for some superficial screening, on an open-access repository to allow the information to reach readers quickly, circumventing the long-drawn process typically associated with processing in peer-reviewed journals. For early-career researchers who might be enthusiastic about obtaining some recognition for their efforts, or wanting open and public input about their work, preprints are certainly a useful publication choice. However, if health-related data and information have not been carefully scrutinised, they may pose a risk and may even serve as a source of public health misinformation. Surging growth and competition among preprint servers, coupled with a massive volume of COVID-19-related preprints, mainly on bioRxiv and medRxiv, as well as select indexing now being tested on PubMed, suggests that preprints are being increasingly used in the biomedical sciences. Stronger and more robust ethical policies are needed to screen preprints before they are released to the public, and even if this implies a slight delay in publication, it may increase academics' trust in this form of scientific information and communication. Clear and stringent ethical policies need to be urgently introduced by ethics groups such as COPE and the ICMJE, whose many member journals allow preprints to be posted before traditional peer review. Stringent ethical guidelines that treat misconduct equally in preprints and peer-reviewed papers will boost the integrity of academic publishing.

Peer-to-peer approaches refer to a participatory style of teaching and learning, which increasingly gain popularity as inclusive and participatory interventions to encourage changes towards more sustainable energy practices. However, this prominence has not been matched by evidence on the effectiveness of such approaches. By investigating the design and implementation of the peer-to-peer project useITsmartly, which centred on the topic of energy efficient and sustainable ICT use, this paper focuses on the effectiveness of this peer-to-peer approach as inclusive participatory intervention. Drawing on the environmental justice literature, it addresses particularly the second-level effectiveness, that is the impact peer-to-peer exercises have on the peer educators themselves in terms of capacity building and empowerment. The paper evaluates the preparation, recruitment, training and multiplication phases of the approach and concludes that it is essential to invest enough time and resources to truly recognize the peer educators and their lifestyles and practices, and enable them to participate in the peer education on their own terms. If not, lack of motivation and skills of the peer educators as well as too much focus on quantitative targets may compromise the actual purpose of the peer-to-peer approach and turn it into a top-down exercise.

Software startups have long been a significant driver in economic growth and innovation. The on-going failure of the major number of startups calls for a better understanding of state-of-the-practice of startup activities. Objective With a focus on engineering perspective, this study aims at identifying the change in focus of research area and thematic concepts operating startup research. A systematic mapping study on 74 primary papers (in which 27 papers are newly selected) from 1994 to 2017 was conducted with a comparison with findings from previous mapping studies. A classification schema was developed, and the primary studies were ranked according to their rigour. We discovered that most research has been conducted within the SWEBOK knowledge areas software engineering process, management, construction, design, and requirements, with the shift of focus towards process and management areas. We also provide an alternative classification for future startup research. We find that the rigour of the primary papers was assessed to be higher between 2013–2017 than that of 1994–2013. We also find an inconsistency of characterizing startups. Future work can focus on certain research themes, such as startup evolution models and human aspects, and consolidate the thematic concepts describing software startups. © 2018. This is the authors’ accepted and refereed manuscript to the article. Locked until 19.6.2020 due to copyright restrictions. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

[Excerpt] By March 2020, while the entire planet Earth was entering a dark time of pandemia, we communicated in this editorial the trends of J Optom in different bibliometric indices including Impact Factor, SCImago Journal Rank ing, H-index, CiteScore and Source Normalized Impact per Paper. (1) More recently the CiteScore has been reviewed by Else vier to mitigate some short-term trends and J Optom raised even further in its score from 1.65 to 2.3.2 Accord ing to Scoups, this new calculation enforces credibility of the score by only considering peer-review publications, considering a longer window of 4 years instead of 3 and considering the more recent citations in the year of calculation.3 This is only an aspect of the impact of the journal that has increased steadily as it continues to con solidate through different milestones achieved over the last years (4). [...], (undefined)

Serious and fatal accidents happen on construction sites every year. However, earlier research indicate that the root of the accidents can often be found in the early phases of the project process. In this paper, we examine what occurs in the early phases of project management in construction that can be harmful to health and safety in the construction phase. The investigation focuses on two main research questions: 1) can health and safety in the construction phase be improved during the early phases of project management, and, if so, 2) what are the main challenges of health and safety in the early phases of project management that need to be addressed in order to do so? The data presented is collected by interviewing regional safety representatives in Norway. They point to three main challenges to health and safety in the early phases of construction projects: 1) lack of competence, 2) lack of prioritization, and 3) lack of consequence. In conclusion, we suggest that educational institutions, construction clients and public authorities all need to play their part to improve the situation.

Coordinating research objectives concurrently with product development and engineering is a challenge in student-run CubeSat projects. The literature review from several universities and the International Council of Systems Engineering (INCOSE) Space Systems Working Group (SSWG) all acknowledge the need for a better methodology. This paper describes findings from a university CubeSat exploratory case study related to team management, reviews and design. Introducing Systems Engineering (SE) tools such as formalized reviews, A3 reports, systemigrams and N2 dependency maps have aided the development process. This was evident through faster development iterations and fewer design confusions. Results show that relocation into a common space based on recommendations from Concurrent Engineering (CE) has improved overall communication and team work. © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)