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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |