bims-evares Biomed News
on Evaluation of research
Issue of 2026–08–02
eighteen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society



  1. J Orthop Traumatol. 2026 Jul 22. pii: 38. [Epub ahead of print]27(1):
       BACKGROUND: Orthopaedics, as a surgical speciality with a structurally narrower citing audience and lower citation density than general medicine, is systematically disadvantaged in any cross-disciplinary comparison relying on absolute citation counts. Whether this disadvantage is stable or has changed over time has not been previously quantified.
    METHODS: The 100 most-cited articles indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection were identified for medicine and orthopaedics in 2014 and 2024. Citation data were extracted from a single snapshot taken on 19 January 2026. Total citations and citation velocity, defined as citations per year since publication, were compared between fields and across time points using Mann-Whitney U tests. Ratio-based analyses and distributional characteristics were also assessed.
    RESULTS: Median citation counts were substantially higher in medicine than in orthopaedics in both years, reaching 5055 versus 288 in 2014 and 720.5 versus 34.0 in 2024, corresponding to 17.6- and 21.2-fold differences, respectively. Citation velocity followed the same pattern, with medicine maintaining an approximately 17- to 21-fold advantage at both time points. Within-field temporal analysis showed that citation velocity remained broadly stable in medicine between cohorts, whilst orthopaedics demonstrated reduced early citation accrual in the more recent cohort. Citation distributions were more right-skewed in medicine, with a small number of articles accounting for a disproportionate share of total citations, whereas orthopaedic citations were more evenly distributed across the top 100.
    CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedics demonstrated substantially lower citation performance than general medicine articles, and this gap appeared to persist over time.
    Keywords:  Bibliometric; Citations; Clarivate; Impact factor; Metrics; Speciality; Web of Science
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s10195-026-00958-y
  2. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2026 ;40 20
       Background: Retraction serves as a critical corrective mechanism in scientific publishing, preventing the spread of flawed or misleading data. This study aimed to systematically analyze the characteristics of retracted articles within the field of diabetes research, highlight potential vulnerabilities in the integrity of diabetes research, and address gaps in understanding the nature and implications of research misconduct in this crucial medical discipline.
    Methods: This study aimed to analyze retracted publications in the field of diabetes published from 1978 to 2024 using the Web of Science database. Information from the selected articles was obtained through the Retraction Watch Database. Extracted details included the journal title, type of article, country of origin, publication and retraction dates, number of authors, and reasons for retraction. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods.
    Results: Between 1978 and 2024, our review revealed 316 retracted articles. The journals Science (n = 1517) and The Lancet (n = 742) accounted for the highest number of these highly cited retractions, while the journals Biomed Research International (n = 31) and Diabetes (n = 15) accounted for the most cited of these retractions. The most common reasons for retraction were investigations initiated by the journal or publisher and concerns related to data integrity. The years with the highest number of retractions were 2023 (n = 91) and 2016 (n = 40), whereas the majority of retracted articles were initially published in 2022 and 2021 (n = 26). Collaborative research involving authors from China (n = 137), the United States (n = 71), and India (n = 24) was most frequently associated with these retractions.
    Conclusion: Safeguarding the integrity of scientific literature, particularly in high-stakes fields such as diabetes research, requires a fundamental shift from reactive retractions to multilateral proactive systemic reform. Cultivating an ethical research culture (changing incentives to reward research quality and transparency over quantity by Institutions and funders); empowering researchers (providing the skills for rigorous and ethical research through mandatory, ongoing ethics training); and ensuring vigilant publishing (enforcing clear policies, rapidly investigating issues, and performing transparent retractions to protect the scientific record by journals).
    Keywords:  Article; Duplication; Ethics; Plagiarism; Publication; Retraction
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.40.20
  3. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2026 Jul;14(7): e7956
       Background: Plastic surgery thrives on collaboration across disciplines, yet the extent and impact of interdisciplinary research within the field remain poorly understood. This study quantified collaboration patterns among academic plastic surgery residency programs and evaluated their association with research productivity, funding, and journal influence.
    Methods: PubMed was queried for articles published by academic plastic surgery programs from 2018 to 2023. Articles were considered collaborative when the senior author was affiliated with a plastic surgery division and at least 1 coauthor represented a different department or specialty.
    Results: Among 6686 publications, 44.8% (n = 2992) involved interdisciplinary collaboration. Most collaborations occurred with surgical specialties (56.1%), particularly general surgery (17.4%), otolaryngology (14.6%), and orthopedic surgery (11.8%). Medical specialties accounted for 38.1% of collaborations, led by genetics and genomics (13.9%), whereas engineering represented the largest nonmedical collaborator (7.6%). Institutional productivity was not associated with collaboration rate (R ² = 0.01, P = 0.60). Collaborative studies were more frequently published in non-plastic surgery journals (P < 0.001), which had higher impact factors than plastic surgery journals. Institutions with greater STEM collaboration demonstrated significantly higher overall research funding ($2.32 ± $1.05 billion versus $2.03 ± $1.12 billion, P < 0.001).
    Conclusions: Interdisciplinary collaborations are common in plastic surgery research and are associated with publication in higher impact journals and increased institutional funding. Strategic partnerships across disciplines may enhance the academic reach and funding potential of plastic surgery research programs.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000007956
  4. J Phys Act Health. 2026 Jul 28. 1-16
       BACKGROUND: Women remain underrepresented in academic leadership globally, particularly in health fields. In Latin America, limited funding, centralized research systems, and institutional inequities further restrict women's advancement. In physical activity and health research, these disparities may limit perspectives shaping evidence and policy. We examined institutional environments, authorship patterns, and factors associated with women researchers' progression across Latin America.
    METHODS: We conducted an observational study across 13 Latin American countries using 3 approaches: (1) a cross-sectional survey using the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success (CCWAS) instrument, with normalized domain scores analyzed descriptively and visualized with equiplots in R; (2) a network analysis of institutional, demographic, and productivity variables using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regularization and centrality metrics; and (3) bibliometric analysis of PubMed-indexed publications to assess gendered authorship trajectories and team composition.
    RESULTS: Among 121 participants, midcareer researchers reported the lowest CCWAS scores, particularly for work-life balance, whereas senior researchers reported the highest supportive leadership scores. Academic culture perceptions varied across countries. Network analysis identified principal investigator roles, coauthorship, and supportive leadership perceptions as central factors associated with academic productivity. Bibliometrics showed that women more often progressed from contributor to first-author roles than to last-author positions. Teams with female first and last authors had the highest proportion of women contributors.
    CONCLUSIONS: Achieving gender equity in physical activity and health research in Latin America requires more than representation. Institutional efforts to promote inclusive leadership, supportive environments, and midcareer advancement are essential for equitable, resilient research systems.
    Keywords:  CCWAS; Latin America; academic leadership; bibliometric analysis, network analysis; gender equity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2026-0063
  5. Acad Radiol. 2026 Jul 31. pii: S1076-6332(26)00473-3. [Epub ahead of print]
       RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Academic radiologists concentrate scholarly activity within defined subspecialties, producing heterogeneous institutional research profiles. The relationship between institutional bibliometric performance and National Institutes of Health (NIH) radiology funding across subspecialties is incompletely characterized. We evaluated institutional scholarly output across U.S. radiology subspecialties and its association with NIH funding.
    MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed U.S. academic radiology faculty using Scopus data (March 2026). Faculty were identified from institutional websites and categorized into eight subspecialties. Institutional publications, citations, and h-index values were aggregated and compared with 2025 NIH radiology funding rankings from the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research using Spearman's rank correlation.
    RESULTS: 121 institutions encompassing 6488 faculty were included. Scholarly output was highly concentrated: the 5 most productive institutions accounted for 21% of publications and 23% of citations, and the top 25 for 61% and 67%. NIH funding was even more concentrated (top 5, 30%; top 25, 81%). Mayo Clinic-Rochester led in total publications (18,197) and citations (774,565). Rankings by total publications, total citations, and summed faculty h-index were closely aligned, whereas per-faculty metrics highlighted a distinct group of smaller programs. Subspecialty leadership varied substantially. Among 62 matched institutions, total publications, summed faculty h-index, total citations, and faculty count correlated most strongly with NIH funding rank (ρ = 0.748, 0.745, 0.719, and 0.702, respectively; all p < 0.001).
    CONCLUSION: Radiology scholarly productivity is concentrated within a few dozen academic centers, with substantial subspecialty heterogeneity within institutions. Aggregate bibliometric indicators show moderate concordance with NIH funding, suggesting that cumulative scholarly output reflects institutional research strength.
    Keywords:  Academic radiology; Bibliometrics; Institutional ranking; NIH funding; Scholarly productivity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2026.06.065
  6. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2026 ;40 14
       Background: Social media platforms, particularly X (former Twitter), are increasingly used by researchers to disseminate scientific knowledge. However, the extent to which X engagement influences traditional academic impact remains unclear. This study examines the association between X mentions, Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), and citation counts for highly visible research outputs.
    Methods: A narrative review of studies on academic influencers in medical fields was combined with a quantitative correlation analysis of the top 100 Altmetric articles (2017-2021). Data included AAS, X mentions, and citation counts from Dimensions. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to assess year-by-year relationships. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar on August 3, 2024, using MeSH terms and Boolean operators.
    Results: Strong positive correlations were found between X mentions and AAS (r = 0.673-0.944, P < 0.05). Correlations between AAS and citations were weaker and variable (r = 0.075-0.504, P < 0.05 in 2020 and 2021). The narrative review revealed mixed associations between social media influence and academic productivity across specialties.
    Conclusion: X amplifies research visibility but has limited predictive power for long-term citation impact. These findings inform research evaluation by highlighting altmetrics as complementary tools. Future studies should explore multi-platform data and address global disparities in digital influence.
    Keywords:  Academic Influence; Altmetrics; Communication; Research; Social Media
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.40.14
  7. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2026 Jul 25. pii: S0964-3397(26)00173-4. [Epub ahead of print]97 104505
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2026.104505
  8. World J Mens Health. 2026 Jul 13.
       PURPOSE: Research productivity is a key indicator of academic performance and is shaped by access to resources, collaborative engagement, and effective communication. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of resource availability, research collaboration, and the use of digital communication tools (DCTs) on researchers' productivity.
    MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used an online questionnaire to evaluate the influence of DCTs on research productivity among eligible Global Andrology Forum members. The questionnaire collected data on demographics, research output, collaboration patterns, DCT preferences, and institutional support. The productivity data of participants were extracted from Scopus and Google Scholar. The economic status of the participants' country was obtained from the World Bank. Two-group comparisons used the Mann-Whitney U test, while multi-group comparisons used the Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc analyses when significant. Spearman's correlation analysis and a multivariable robust linear regression model were used to assess associations and evaluate the robustness of the findings, respectively.
    RESULTS: A total of 141 of 144 researchers completed the survey, representing 37 countries across diverse economic settings. Researchers from high-income countries demonstrated significantly higher productivity than those from middle-income countries. DCTs (WhatsApp and Zoom) were widely used for messaging and virtual meetings. Time spent on WhatsApp was positively correlated with research performance, including number of publications (ρ=0.224, p=0.008), total citations (ρ=0.259, p=0.002), most cited article (ρ=0.215, p=0.011), h-index (ρ=0.289, p=0.001), co-authorship (ρ=0.223, p=0.008), and international collaboration (ρ=0.274, p=0.001). Researchers who spent more than 4 hours per week on WhatsApp demonstrated significantly higher productivity indicators.
    CONCLUSIONS: DCTs and structured global research networks are essential for strengthening research capacity and promoting equitable participation across regions. While economic constraints may limit productivity, effective use of digital collaboration platforms can help narrow these gaps by expanding networking opportunities, enabling meaningful collaboration, and enhancing overall research output.
    Keywords:  Communication; Economic status; Productivity; Publications; Research; Social media
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.260074
  9. J Arthroplasty. 2026 Jul 25. pii: S0883-5403(26)00813-2. [Epub ahead of print]
       BACKGROUND: The extent and characteristics of Large Language Model (LLM) utilization in arthroplasty literature remain undefined. In this study, we aimed to quantify the extent of LLM utilization in manuscripts across major arthroplasty journals. Additionally, we sought to assess temporal trends in LLM utilization, as well as associations with author productivity, geographic origin, and citation impact.
    METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of 3,352 original research articles from six arthroplasty journals from the era before advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) (Pre-AI) (2018 to 2022) and the era after advanced LLMs (post-AI) (2023 to 2025) was performed. The text was processed using a detection algorithm. Journal-specific thresholds for significant AI involvement were established (mean + two standard deviations of pre-AI scores). Author productivity, primary language of affiliate country, and citation counts were analyzed.
    RESULTS: In the post-AI era, five of six journals demonstrated significantly higher odds of AI involvement (P < 0.05). The proportion of AI-flagged articles rose from less than 4.2% (2018 to 2021) to 20.4% in 2025, which was a notable nonlinear increase compared to 2024. The first authors in the 90th percentile of the dataset for authorship demonstrated significantly greater odds of exceeding AI thresholds compared to authors who only had one publication in the dataset (odds ratio (OR) = 1.83, P < 0.001). Conversely, non-English affiliate country authors (P = 0.436) and zero-citation-count articles (P = 0.882) did not have higher odds.
    CONCLUSION: Unsurprisingly, detectable AI assistance in arthroplasty research has increased significantly since the public release of LLMs. The AI tools are disproportionately utilized by high-productivity authors but not non-English-speaking country authors, suggesting adoption is driven by research efficiency and scalability rather than language barriers. Higher rates of LLM use were not found in zero citation articles.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2026.07.041
  10. Science. 2026 Jul 30. 393(6810): 447-448
      More than half of AI "unicorns" have never published a paper or preprint.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ael0166
  11. Cureus. 2026 Jun;18(6): e111762
       INTRODUCTION: Neurosurgical fellowships to obtain additional surgical training after residency are a career option widely available to the newer generation of neurosurgeons. This study aims to analyze current trends in fellowship training among spine neurosurgeons in Florida and factors that influence the choice of fellowship based on year, location, and academic trajectory.
    METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study collected demographic data and bibliometric information on neurosurgeons specializing in spine, comparing those with fellowship training and those without. The information was gathered from the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Florida Department of Health databases.  Results: A total of 113 spine-specialized neurosurgeons with active medical licenses were identified in the state of Florida at the time of this study in 2026. A proportion (23.53%; n = 12) of Florida-based spine neurosurgeons obtained their fellowship training in Florida, most commonly at the University of Miami/Jackson Health System. Out of a total of 113, only two (1.77%) spine neurosurgeons are female, and four (3.54%) have osteopathic doctoral degrees (D.O.). In 1960-1964 and 1975-1979, none (n = 0) had completed a spine fellowship, while 33.33% (n = 1) had done so in 1970-1974. The proportion was 28.57% (n = 2) in 1980-1984 and 16.67% (n = 2) in 1985-1989. An overall increase was observed in subsequent years: 23.53% (n = 4) in 1990-1994, 47.83% (n = 11) in 1995-1999, 50.00% (n = 4) in 2000-2004, 62.50% (n = 5) in 2005-2009, and 75.00% (n = 6) in 2010-2014. The highest percentage was observed in 2015-2019 at 73.33% (n = 11), followed by 66.67% (n = 6) in 2020-present.
    CONCLUSION:  Over the past 60+ years, there has been an increase in the number of Florida-based spine neurosurgeons pursuing fellowship training, with the highest percentage seen in those graduating from 2015-2019. However, there is still a low representation of female and osteopathic spine neurosurgeons in Florida. This growing trend of spine-specialization highlights a potential shift in neurosurgery career trajectories and has important implications for future workforce planning and patient care in spine surgery.
    Keywords:  academic neurosurgery; fellowship training; florida neurosurgeons; geographic distribution; neurosurgical workforce; spine fellowship; spine neurosurgery; subspecialization trends; women in neurosurgery; workforce diversity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.111762
  12. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2026 Jun 16. pii: S2212-4403(26)00232-4. [Epub ahead of print]
      The aim of this study was to evaluate the internationalization of researchers in Oral Pathology (OP)/Oral Medicine (OM) in Latin America (LATAM). This scientometric study was conducted with public domain data from eight countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay), collected from January to July 2025. The Scopus database was the source for collecting the variables. Student's t test and Mann-Whitney U test were performed to analyze the mean and median citations of scientific articles classified as having international collaborations and open access (OA) publications. Binary logistic regression was performed to predict the probability of international collaboration and OA status based on citation counts. International collaborations were present in 27.4% of the publications, and 39.9% of the scientific articles were published under OA. Publications with international collaborations received significantly more citations than noncollaborative articles (P < .001). OA showed no association with the mean/median citations. International collaboration is the main driver of scientific impact in LATAM OP/OM, while OA status shows no independent benefit for citations. The low prevalence of collaborative articles reveals structural barriers that limit regional science, suggesting that strategic networking is more critical for visibility than publication accessibility alone.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2026.06.001
  13. Healthcare (Basel). 2026 Jul 20. pii: 2188. [Epub ahead of print]14(14):
      Background/Objectives: Since the establishment of the Korean Neonatal Network (KNN) in 2013, numerous studies have been conducted using its nationwide registry of very low birth weight infants (VLBWIs). Beyond serving as a clinical database, the KNN has evolved into a national healthcare research infrastructure supporting multicenter collaboration, evidence generation, and quality improvement in neonatal care. This study aimed to evaluate the scientific productivity, collaborative structure, and knowledge-generation capacity of the KNN through bibliometric network analysis and to identify future research directions in Korean neonatal research. Methods: Publications from 1 January 2015 to 5 June 2024 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Literature searches were performed using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), Emtree terms, and related keywords associated with very low birth weight infants, extremely low birth weight infants, and the Korean Neonatal Network. A total of 7060 global publications and 86 KNN-related publications were identified for analysis. Co-authorship and keyword co-occurrence analyses were conducted using VOSviewer to evaluate international collaborations, research themes, and temporal trends in keyword emergence. Scimago Graphica was used to visualize keyword evolution, and burst detection analysis was performed using CiteSpace to identify emerging research topics. Results: Among global publications on VLBWIs, South Korea ranked 13th worldwide with 226 publications and demonstrated substantial international collaboration, particularly with researchers in the United States. Analysis of the 86 KNN-related publications revealed the rapid development of observational and topic-focused research areas within a relatively short period. Keyword clustering and temporal analyses demonstrated a progressive expansion of research interests as the database matured. Burst analysis identified emerging themes related to mortality and morbidity risk factors, neurodevelopmental outcomes, and predictive modeling using machine learning techniques. Conclusions: Bibliometric analysis demonstrated that research based on the KNN has largely followed global trends in neonatal research despite its relatively recent establishment. The KNN has successfully functioned as a nationwide research infrastructure facilitating collaborative knowledge generation and scientific productivity. Nevertheless, several underrepresented research areas and opportunities for broader international collaboration were identified. These findings may help guide future research strategies and maximize the impact of national neonatal registry-based healthcare systems.
    Keywords:  bibliographic databases; bibliography of medicine; bibliometrics; data visualization; extremely low birth weight infant; factual databases; very low birth weight infant
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14142188
  14. Find ACL EMNLP. 2025 Nov;2025 23558-23568
      Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping how scientific knowledge is accessed and represented. This study evaluates the extent to which popular and frontier LLMs including GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Gemini 1.5 Pro recognize scientists, benchmarking their outputs against OpenAlex and Wikipedia. Using a dataset focusing on 100,000 physicists from OpenAlex to evaluate LLM recognition, we uncover substantial disparities: LLMs exhibit selective and inconsistent recognition patterns. Recognition correlates strongly with scholarly impact such as citations, and remains uneven across gender and geography. Women researchers, and researchers from Africa, Asia, and Latin America are significantly underrecognized. We further examine the role of training data provenance, identifying Wikipedia as a potential sources that contributes to recognition gaps. Our findings highlight how LLMs can reflect, and potentially amplify existing disparities in science, underscoring the need for more transparent and inclusive knowledge systems.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.findings-emnlp.1279
  15. Shoulder Elbow. 2026 Jul 27. 17585732261472066
       Introduction: Practice guidelines in upper extremity surgery are heavily influenced by systematic reviews (SRs). SRs are prone to "spin"; misleading reporting that can distort interpretation, such as omitting individual study risk of bias when formulating study conclusions. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and types of spin employed in abstracts of SRs from leading upper extremity surgical journals.
    Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of SRs published between 2015 and 2025 was conducted across the three highest impact factor upper extremity journals. Included study abstracts were assessed for nine types of spin using a published framework by Yavchitz et al. (2016). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the prevalence of spin and its associations with study bibliometric characteristics.
    Results: Spin was found in 28/54 included articles (51.9%). 21/54 (38.9%) studies demonstrated more than one type of spin. The most common type of spin employed was type 9 (claims of benefit despite reporting bias) (27/54, 50.0%).
    Conclusion: Over 50% of SRs published in leading upper extremity surgical journals demonstrated at least one form of spin in their abstracts. Claiming benefits despite a high risk of bias was most commonly employed. These findings highlight the need for robust reporting frameworks to ensure SRs are interpreted effectively.
    Level of evidence: IV.
    Keywords:  Spin; abstract misrepresentation; orthopaedic surgery; reporting bias; upper extremity surgery
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/17585732261472066
  16. Front Res Metr Anal. 2026 ;11 1893522
      Funding systems increasingly reward scientists who frame technical questions as narratives of national priority and societal impact, yet whether this policy-facing language carries through to how science is actually reported, or merely serves as a temporary rhetorical layer for grant competition, remains unclear. Using Google Gemini as a large language model-assisted text-analytic tool, we scored 400 matched pairs of funded grant abstracts and their linked peer-reviewed publications from China and the United States, across two contrasting fields: artificial intelligence and cancer immunology. Each text was scored 1-10 for macro-narrative ("hype") language and for mechanistic scientific logic, and a blinded 20% subset rated by two human raters showed broad agreement with the model-based scores. Funding language differed more by field than by country: artificial intelligence grants in both nations showed substantially higher policy-facing rhetoric than cancer immunology grants, which remained anchored in mechanistic logic. This rhetorical inflation, however, largely disappeared at the publication stage, where macro-narrative scores dropped sharply across both countries and disciplines-a grant-to-publication shift we term strategic textual decoupling. These findings suggest that funding systems may encourage rhetorical compliance without necessarily improving the scientific record, and that the gap between the language required to win funding and the language used to communicate science represents a hidden cognitive tax. Reducing unnecessary narrative inflation in grant evaluation, and tailoring assessment to disciplinary realities, could improve research integrity and the efficient use of researchers' time.
    Keywords:  artificial intelligence; cancer immunology; funding rhetoric; grant writing; large language models; research evaluation; research integrity; scientific communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2026.1893522
  17. Commun Eng. 2026 Jul 31. pii: 142. [Epub ahead of print]5(1):
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/s44172-026-00744-y