Cargando…

Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice

Journals exert considerable control over letters, commentaries and online comments that criticize prior research (post-publication critique). We assessed policies (Study One) and practice (Study Two) related to post-publication critique at 15 top-ranked journals in each of 22 scientific disciplines...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hardwicke, Tom E., Thibault, Robert T., Kosie, Jessica E., Tzavella, Loukia, Bendixen, Theiss, Handcock, Sarah A., Köneke, Vivian E., Ioannidis, John P. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399707/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36039285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220139
_version_ 1784772586329079808
author Hardwicke, Tom E.
Thibault, Robert T.
Kosie, Jessica E.
Tzavella, Loukia
Bendixen, Theiss
Handcock, Sarah A.
Köneke, Vivian E.
Ioannidis, John P. A.
author_facet Hardwicke, Tom E.
Thibault, Robert T.
Kosie, Jessica E.
Tzavella, Loukia
Bendixen, Theiss
Handcock, Sarah A.
Köneke, Vivian E.
Ioannidis, John P. A.
author_sort Hardwicke, Tom E.
collection PubMed
description Journals exert considerable control over letters, commentaries and online comments that criticize prior research (post-publication critique). We assessed policies (Study One) and practice (Study Two) related to post-publication critique at 15 top-ranked journals in each of 22 scientific disciplines (N = 330 journals). Two-hundred and seven (63%) journals accepted post-publication critique and often imposed limits on length (median 1000, interquartile range (IQR) 500–1200 words) and time-to-submit (median 12, IQR 4–26 weeks). The most restrictive limits were 175 words and two weeks; some policies imposed no limits. Of 2066 randomly sampled research articles published in 2018 by journals accepting post-publication critique, 39 (1.9%, 95% confidence interval [1.4, 2.6]) were linked to at least one post-publication critique (there were 58 post-publication critiques in total). Of the 58 post-publication critiques, 44 received an author reply, of which 41 asserted that original conclusions were unchanged. Clinical Medicine had the most active culture of post-publication critique: all journals accepted post-publication critique and published the most post-publication critique overall, but also imposed the strictest limits on length (median 400, IQR 400–550 words) and time-to-submit (median 4, IQR 4–6 weeks). Our findings suggest that top-ranked academic journals often pose serious barriers to the cultivation, documentation and dissemination of post-publication critique.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9399707
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93997072022-08-28 Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice Hardwicke, Tom E. Thibault, Robert T. Kosie, Jessica E. Tzavella, Loukia Bendixen, Theiss Handcock, Sarah A. Köneke, Vivian E. Ioannidis, John P. A. R Soc Open Sci Science, Society and Policy Journals exert considerable control over letters, commentaries and online comments that criticize prior research (post-publication critique). We assessed policies (Study One) and practice (Study Two) related to post-publication critique at 15 top-ranked journals in each of 22 scientific disciplines (N = 330 journals). Two-hundred and seven (63%) journals accepted post-publication critique and often imposed limits on length (median 1000, interquartile range (IQR) 500–1200 words) and time-to-submit (median 12, IQR 4–26 weeks). The most restrictive limits were 175 words and two weeks; some policies imposed no limits. Of 2066 randomly sampled research articles published in 2018 by journals accepting post-publication critique, 39 (1.9%, 95% confidence interval [1.4, 2.6]) were linked to at least one post-publication critique (there were 58 post-publication critiques in total). Of the 58 post-publication critiques, 44 received an author reply, of which 41 asserted that original conclusions were unchanged. Clinical Medicine had the most active culture of post-publication critique: all journals accepted post-publication critique and published the most post-publication critique overall, but also imposed the strictest limits on length (median 400, IQR 400–550 words) and time-to-submit (median 4, IQR 4–6 weeks). Our findings suggest that top-ranked academic journals often pose serious barriers to the cultivation, documentation and dissemination of post-publication critique. The Royal Society 2022-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9399707/ /pubmed/36039285 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220139 Text en © 2022 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Science, Society and Policy
Hardwicke, Tom E.
Thibault, Robert T.
Kosie, Jessica E.
Tzavella, Loukia
Bendixen, Theiss
Handcock, Sarah A.
Köneke, Vivian E.
Ioannidis, John P. A.
Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title_full Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title_fullStr Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title_full_unstemmed Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title_short Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
title_sort post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice
topic Science, Society and Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399707/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36039285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220139
work_keys_str_mv AT hardwicketome postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT thibaultrobertt postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT kosiejessicae postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT tzavellaloukia postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT bendixentheiss postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT handcocksaraha postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT konekeviviane postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice
AT ioannidisjohnpa postpublicationcritiqueattoprankedjournalsacrossscientificdisciplinesacrosssectionalassessmentofpoliciesandpractice