Search

Background and Aim: To evaluate the publication rate of articles related to cardiac surgery in the four main cardiovascular journals over the last 5 years., Methods: A bibliometric review of all full-length articles published between January 2014 and March 2020 in the top four cardiovascular journals (Circulation, European Heart Journal (EHJ), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC), and JAMA Cardiology) was conducted. For each eligible article in the four journals, the journal of publication, study design, area of interest, country of origin, and type of intervention tested (for cardiac surgery and interventional cardiology studies) were extracted. The affiliations of all editorial board members were identified from journal websites or from online searches and recorded as from cardiac surgery, cardiology, or another discipline. Correlations between variables were evaluated., Results: A total of 4835 articles were reviewed. Cardiac surgery studies amounted to 6.2% (104) of total research publications in JACC, 4.4% (74) in Circulation, 3.6% (13) in JAMA Cardiology, and 2.0% (22) in EHJ (P < .001). The percentage of cardiac surgery publications was significantly less than interventional cardiology publications (P < .001)., Conclusions: Cardiac surgery studies represent only a small minority of the articles published in the top cardiovascular journals over the last 5 years, with significant differences between individual journals. Cardiac surgery studies were more often observational and this may constitute one important reason for their under-representation., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Data culture/s as a research topic has begun to attract attention from a wide range of disciplines, albeit with inconsistent application of definitions, dimensions, and applications. This work builds on a call to investigate data culture/s within the information studies domain as a topic related to, but distinct from, information culture. The purpose of this study is to explore what is known about data culture/s in greater depth. We apply a retroductive approach to select and consider likely dimensions, inputs, and aspects of data culture/s in order to further map this construct to the literature, and thereby highlight gaps and opportunities to add to this body of knowledge. The initial candidate dimensions explored below include data‐related skills and attitudes, data sharing, data use/reuse, data ethics and governance, and a specific focus on Indigenous perspectives to provide insights on why and how a group may contest the emergent dominant discourse of data culture/s. Our conclusion highlights areas needing further research to fully define and examine the dimensions, inputs, and aspects of data culture/s, and calls for greater understanding and engagement with data culture/s from the information studies community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently commissioned a report reviewing evidence on electronic cigarettes and making policy recommendations. A version of it was subsequently published as an academic paper. We identify important errors in the description and interpretation of the studies reviewed, and find many of its key conclusions misleading.

Renewable energy production may offer advantages to human health by way of less pollution and fewer climate-change associated ill-health effects. Limited data suggests that renewable energy will also offer benefits to workers in the form of reduced occupational injury, illness and deaths. However, studies of worker safety and health in the industry are limited. The Mountain and Plains Education and Research Center (MAP ERC) Energy Summit held in April 2011 explored issues concerning worker health and safety in the renewable energy industry. The limited information on hazards of working in the renewable energy industry emphasizes the need for further research. Two basic approaches to guiding both prevention and future research should include: (1) applying lessons learned from other fields of occupational safety and health, particularly the extractive energy industry; and (2) utilizing knowledge of occupational hazards of specific materials and processes used in the renewable energy industry., (© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Bibliometric quantification is frequently used as metrics for the evaluation of the scientific performance of researchers and institutions. The researchers' merit is usually assessed by the analysis of quantitative parameters such as the number of publications, the impact factor of journals, the total number of citations, or the h‐index, although the limitations in translating these indicators into the impact of the outcome of scientific production are a matter of harsh criticism. To assess, based on factual evidences, the validity of traditional bibliometric analyses to conclude on the impact of papers to advance the state of the art, we carried out an innovative methodology on selected publications (test set). This methodology is based on identifying those citations of the test set papers that truly embed the methods, concepts, or hypotheses to build new knowledge and formulate conclusions. The results show that the percentage of citations that reflect the real impact of the papers of the test set has an average value of 12.4% of total citations and is not related to the impact factor of the journal where the test set papers were published. In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates factually, using experimental data, the total failure of using quantitative bulk citation analyses to conclude on the scientific impact of publications. Only a careful analysis of how the work described in papers was embedded on the subsequent work and/or conclusions of others can tell about the real contribution of a published work to the development of new knowledge and advancement of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared to previous studies that generally detect scientific breakthroughs based on citation patterns, this article proposes a knowledge entity‐based disruption indicator by quantifying the change of knowledge directly created and inspired by scientific breakthroughs to their evolutionary trajectories. Two groups of analytic units, including MeSH terms and their co‐occurrences, are employed independently by the indicator to measure the change of knowledge. The effectiveness of the proposed indicators was evaluated against the four datasets of scientific breakthroughs derived from four recognition trials. In terms of identifying scientific breakthroughs, the proposed disruption indicator based on MeSH co‐occurrences outperforms that based on MeSH terms and three earlier citation‐based disruption indicators. It is also shown that in our indicator, measuring the change of knowledge inspired by the focal paper in its evolutionary trajectory is a larger contributor than measuring the change created by the focal paper. Our study not only offers empirical insights into conceptual understanding of scientific breakthroughs but also provides practical disruption indicator for scientists and science management agencies searching for valuable research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]