Search

The article titled "Laser Welding of UNS S33207 Hyper-Duplex Stainless Steel to 6061 Aluminum Alloy Using High Entropy Alloy as a Filler Material" has been retracted by the Applied Sciences Editorial Office. Concerns were raised about image overlaps between this article and a previously published article with no common authorship. An investigation confirmed the overlap of figures in both articles, leading to the decision to retract the publication. The retraction was approved by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. Dhanesh G. Mohan agreed to the retraction, while Jacek Tomków and Sasan Sattarpanah Karganroudi did not provide a comment. [Extracted from the article]

The article titled "Envariance as a Symmetry in Quantum Mechanics and Applications to Statistical Mechanics" has been retracted by the Symmetry Editorial Office. Concerns were raised about the article's overlap with previously published studies by different authors. An investigation confirmed that sections 2-5 of the article contained text and equations that were not appropriately acknowledged or cited from the earlier studies. As a result, the article has been retracted in accordance with MDPI's retraction policy and the Committee on Publication Ethics's retraction guidelines. The authors did not provide a comment on this decision. [Extracted from the article]

I want to thank the authors of the articles published in I Drugs in R& i D over the course of 2022. The quality of published articles is also testament to the diligence of the peer reviewers. [Extracted from the article]

A 'Letter to the Editor' is an abbreviated form of communication where 'readers' can express their carefully considered scientific opinion about a recently published article in a journal. It is considered as 'post-publication peer review'. There are certain things that a letter writer and the 'editor' need to keep in mind while writing a 'Letter' for a journal. The 'editor' needs to curate the contents of the 'Letter' and make sure that there are no misinformation shared. The formatting, type, scope and the scientific quality of the 'Letter' depend on the journal that publishes them, and hence, different publications may require their 'letter writers' to present the information that they want in a certain way. The following article reflects an overview of the role of editors and writers, guidelines, scope, and format of the 'Letter to the Editor'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: There are concerns in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for scientific manuscripts. This study examines trends in editorial and peer review processes in an ophthalmological journal over the last decade. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of editorial data from the journal Acta Ophthalmologica containing all manuscript submissions between 2010 and 2020. Results: The number of yearly submissions grew between 2010 and 2019 from 1014 to 1623, and in 2020, the number of submissions increased to 2449. In total, the number of submissions increased by 142% between 2010 and 2020. Similarly, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts increased from 48% to 67% during the period 2010–2020. The number of invitations needed to obtain one review showed an increase from 1.9 to 2.6 between 2010 and 2019, but remained stable between 2019 and 2020. However, the number of reviewers per reviewed manuscript, reviewed manuscripts per reviewer and time from invitation to completed review assignment remained almost constant between 2010 and 2020. Researchers based in North American were disproportionally often invited to review (18%) compared to their share of published articles (7%), and they also declined review invitation more frequently compared to scholars in other parts of the world. Conclusions: The study revealed an increase in submitted manuscripts to an ophthalmological journal over the last decade, with a further increase during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The number of reviewer invitations needed to obtain one review grew during the study period but remained constant between 2019 and 2020, despite a vast increase in submitted manuscripts. Hence, the burden for unique reviewers did not increase. Instead, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts grew, and the reviewer pool expanded, which allowed the annual average number of reviews by individual reviewers to remain stable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article contributes a novel dataset mapping the partnership literature in the community engagement field and invites scholars of community-academic partnerships in this field to participate in the development of scoping reviews as a way to effectively scan extant literature as they seek to build upon or critique it. This scoping review includes key article-level characteristics regarding the representation of community-academic partnerships within 141 published articles from seven peer-reviewed journals in the community engagement field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]