bims-evares Biomed News
on Evaluation of research
Issue of 2026–03–08
eleven papers selected by
Thomas Krichel, Open Library Society
  1. Impact of Mentorship and Early Authorship on Long-Term Academic Productivity Among Orthopaedic Surgery Trainees.
  2. Amplify your academic influence: proven tactics for elevating your h-index.
  3. Assessment of H-index and research impact amongst academic medical oncologists in Canada.
  4. From Presentation to Publication: Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at the Meetings of Two Neurosurgical Societies in Turkey.
  5. Ten years of ESPU research: Publication rates, determinants, and topic trends of congress abstracts (2015-2024).
  6. Gender distribution in authorship on research submissions at the European College of Veterinary Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress: 2012-2022.
  7. Transplanting Change: The Slow Progress of Gender Equity in Editorial Leadership.
  8. Individual and institutional factors linked to high research productivity among physicians in the Arab Gulf region: implications for healthcare policy.
  9. Socioeconomic determinants of the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Shanghai global ranking of dental schools.
  10. Research and scientific publication in Pediatrics in Spain.
  11. Gaming the peer review system: Evidence for a review mill in medicine highlights the need to ensure reviewer integrity.
  1. JB JS Open Access. 2026 Jan-Mar;11(1):pii: e25.00222. [Epub ahead of print]11(1):
    Impact of Mentorship and Early Authorship on Long-Term Academic Productivity Among Orthopaedic Surgery Trainees.
    Hamza Ahmad, Adam Hart, Alexandra Bunting, Michael Tanzer.
       Background: Early research involvement during medical training may influence several dimensions of future academic development of which scholarly productivity is one measurable component. This study evaluates whether publication activity during residency, including authorship role, journal impact, and mentor H-index, predicts long-term scholarly productivity among orthopaedic surgery trainees.
    Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 112 orthopaedic surgery residents at a single academic institution was conducted. Resident publication metrics, including total publications, first-author contributions, and senior author H-index, were collected and correlated with postresidency academic output using bibliometric databases. Pearson and Spearman correlations, analysis of variance, and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of long-term scholarly productivity.
    Results: Research productivity during residency significantly predicted future scholarly output. Residents with more publications during training had higher postresidency publication counts (r = 0.483, p < 0.001) and H-indices (r = 0.470, p = 0.0004). First-author publications during residency independently predicted postresidency productivity (B = 11.21, p < 0.001), as did coauthorship (B = 9.60, p < 0.001), together explaining 67.4% of the variance in total publications (R2 = 0.674). In addition, mentorship by senior authors with higher H-indices was moderately correlated with future output (r = 0.368, p < 0.001).
    Conclusion: First-author publication experience during residency and mentorship by academically productive faculty are predictors of long-term scholarly success. These findings underscore the importance of structured research opportunities, with an emphasis on meaningful authorship, and high-impact academic mentorship in training programs to foster future productive orthopaedic surgeons.
    Level of Evidence: Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00222
  2. Ig Sanita Pubbl. 2025 Nov-Dec;98(6):98(6): 366-372
    Amplify your academic influence: proven tactics for elevating your h-index.
    B Prithiga, V Aravinth, Elizebth Chaly Preetha, Malar Indhu, Thampy Parvathi.
      One of the most important metrics for evaluating a researcher's performance is the h-index, which assesses productivity as well as citation effect. Emphasizing the significance of quality over quantity, the paper analyses the importance of publishing in high-impact journals and collaborating with influential researchers. It highlights the role of self-citation judiciously and advocates for active engagement in scholarly networks and conferences. Furthermore, it discusses the impact of open-access publications and the advantages of promoting research through social media and academic platforms. Researchers can greatly increase their exposure and intellectual impact in their field by putting these strategies into practice.
  3. Front Res Metr Anal. 2026 ;11 1743565
    Assessment of H-index and research impact amongst academic medical oncologists in Canada.
    Sera Whitelaw, Daniel Jousé Guerra Ordaz, Amina Moustaqim-Barrette, Elena Netchiporouk, Ivan V Litvinov.
       Introduction: The h-index is widely used to measure academic productivity in medicine, yet data on research output among academic medical oncologists in Canada remain limited. This study aimed to characterize the academic profiles of Canadian medical oncologists and identify factors associated with higher h-index scores.
    Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of medical oncologists affiliated with Canadian universities was conducted using publicly available faculty listings, Scopus Author IDs, and professional certification records. Key demographic and academic variables-including sex, years since certification, academic rank, graduate degrees, region of practice, and Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) funding-were collected. Univariate and multivariate log-linear regression models were used to assess the relationship between these factors and the h-index.
    Results: A total of 391 medical oncologists were identified across 15 Canadian institutions. The median national h-index was 14.0, with regional and sex-based differences noted in descriptive statistics. However, in adjusted analyses, only higher academic rank and receipt of CIHR funding were significantly associated with increased h-index values. Other variables, including sex, graduate degrees, region, and years of practice, were not significant predictors of academic productivity.
    Conclusion: These findings highlight the role of institutional advancement and research funding in supporting academic output and may guide future research, policy development, and evaluation practices in academic oncology.
    Keywords:  Canada; academia; h-index; oncology; rank; research funding
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2026.1743565
  4. Turk Neurosurg. 2025 Aug 25.
    From Presentation to Publication: Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at the Meetings of Two Neurosurgical Societies in Turkey.
    Emmanuel Mouladje Tchuela, Ismail Ertan Sevin, Selin Bozdag, Hasan Kamil Sucu.
       AIM: To assess the overall trends in scientific dissemination at neurosurgery meetings organized by the Turkish Neurosurgical Society (TNS) and the Society of Surgery of the Nervous System (SSNS), two major neurosurgical societies in Turkey.
    MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed 2,696 abstracts presented at TNS and SSNS annual meetings (2018-2022) and identified subsequent full-text publications through PubMed and Google Scholar. Data collected included presentation type, neurosurgical subspecialty, journal indexing, impact factor, and time to publication.
    RESULTS: Of 2,696 abstracts, 323 (11.98%) were published as full-text articles, with a median time to publication of 11 months. Oral presentations had a significantly higher publication rate than poster presentations (20.8% vs 5.9%, p 0.001). Award-winning abstracts showed a higher publication rate (73.08%, p 0.001). Most publications appeared in SCIE-indexed journals (59.9%). No significant differences were found between TNS and SSNS in terms of publication rate (p = 0.419) or time to publication (p = 0.806). Rates varied by subspecialty, highest in Surgical Neuroanatomy (30.3%) and Pediatric Neurosurgery (15.5%), and lowest in Spinal (8.7%) and Neuro-oncology (8.5%) (p 0.001).
    CONCLUSION: Although overall publication rates remain modest, oral presentations, award-winning abstracts, and certain subspecialties showed higher conversion to full-text publication. Initiatives such as structured mentorship, multi-center collaboration, and editorial support may enhance dissemination and publication success in Turkish neurosurgery.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.48850-25.2
  5. J Pediatr Urol. 2026 Feb 23. pii: S1477-5131(26)00116-6. [Epub ahead of print]22(3): 105837
    Ten years of ESPU research: Publication rates, determinants, and topic trends of congress abstracts (2015-2024).
    Arzu Canmemiş, Berat Güllü, Çiğdem Ulukaya Durakbaşa.
       BACKGROUND: Scientific abstracts presented at international meetings constitute an important component of academic productivity, yet the extent to which these studies progress to peer-reviewed publication varies widely across medical disciplines. The publication outcomes of the European Society for Pediatric Urology (ESPU) Annual Congresses were last evaluated for the 2003-2010 period, leaving a gap in contemporary data. This study aimed to determine the full-text publication rate of abstracts presented at ESPU congresses between 2015 and 2024 and to identify factors associated with successful publication.
    METHODS: This retrospective study included all accepted scientific abstracts from nine ESPU congress years (2015-2019 and 2021-2024). Abstract metadata were extracted from official program books (n = 1878), and after excluding video presentations, 1821 abstracts were included in the analysis. A publication was defined as a peer-reviewed journal article identified through PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar searches conducted through October 2025. Abstracts were classified by presentation type, study design, research area, multicenter involvement, and topic category. Publication rates were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of publication.
    RESULTS: Overall, 41 % (n = 745) of abstracts progressed to full-text publication. The mean time to publication was 1.23 years, consistent with findings from other major surgical and urological meetings. Publication rates varied significantly by congress year (p < 0.001), with the highest rate in 2016 (50.5 %) and the lowest in 2024 (28.7 %), likely reflecting limited follow-up time. Poster and oral presentations had similar publication rates (40.7 % and 44.8 %, respectively), while case presentations were least likely to be published (21.3 %). Study type significantly influenced publication (p < 0.001): survey studies (54.7 %), meta-analyses (53.3 %), and multicenter research (47.6 %) demonstrated the highest conversion rates, whereas case reports had the lowest (17.4 %). Study area (basic vs. clinical) and study period (retrospective vs. prospective) were not associated with publication. A total of 97.2 % of published articles appeared in journals indexed with an impact factor, most frequently the Journal of Pediatric Urology (35.2 %).
    CONCLUSION: Among ESPU presentations from the past decade, nearly half progressed to peer-reviewed publication, demonstrating substantial scientific output comparable to other surgical and pediatric urology congresses. Publication rate was strongly associated with methodological characteristics-particularly multicenter collaboration and study type-rather than presentation format or research category. These findings highlight the ESPU congresses as an important platform for high-quality academic dissemination and underscore the need for continued emphasis on rigorous study design and broader multicenter research initiatives within pediatric urology.
    Keywords:  Abstract publication; ESPU; Publication rate; Research productivity; Scientific congress; Study design
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2026.105837
  6. PLoS One. 2026 ;21(3): e0343153
    Gender distribution in authorship on research submissions at the European College of Veterinary Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress: 2012-2022.
    Kathryn Pratschke, Kelly Blacklock, Alina Paczesna, Ishita Parakh, Jill R MacKay, Fiona Mackay, Poppy Bristow.
      The objective of this study was to explore gender distribution for authors on research presentations at European College of Veterinary Surgeons (ECVS) Annual Scientific Meetings from 2012-2022. Our populations for data collection included the ECVS Diplomate membership and authors listed for research submissions at the ECVS Annual Scientific Meetings between 2012-2022. Data was extracted from Conference Programs including year, first, second and senior (last) author names, and session type (scientific poster, short communication, resident forum). Authors were assigned a binary gender using a web-based algorithm to determine gender by first name. Gender demographics for ECVS Diploma holders between 1993-2023 was obtained from the ECVS Office for comparison to assess gender representation proportional to the specialty organisation, again this was based on a binary gender archetype. Although there are limitations to this approach, it is consistent with methodology in contemporaneously published papers in the human medical and veterinary fields. We identified 1353 research presentations, of which 1292 had complete information for all authors. At first author, men and women approached parity, but second and senior authors were more commonly men with the discrepancy being most marked at senior author level, and in the resident forum. If the first or senior author was a man, it was significantly more likely the second author would also be a man. There were no changes in authorship trends across the decade evaluated. In conclusion, women approached parity for first author but were under-represented as second and particularly senior author. In veterinary medicine, credit researchers receive is typically based on their position in the author list. First and senior author are more valued positions, with senior author usually having ownership of the project. Second author is the most valuable of the junior co-author positions but carries lower prestige than first or senior author. Further research is required to investigate underlying reasons contributing to ongoing gender disparity at senior author.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343153
  7. Transplant Proc. 2026 Feb 27. pii: S0041-1345(26)00112-0. [Epub ahead of print]
    Transplanting Change: The Slow Progress of Gender Equity in Editorial Leadership.
    Christie Rampersad, Noemie Villemure-Poliquin, Nazia Selzner, Cynthia Tsien, Chaya Shwaartz.
       BACKGROUND: Gender disparities in academic medicine, including journal editorships, are well-documented, but field-specific evaluation is essential to identify and address inequities. Solid organ transplantation, a diverse and multidisciplinary field, reflects broader imbalances, yet editorial board distributions remain understudied. We examined gender distribution, temporal trends, and predictors of female editorship in high-impact transplantation journals.
    METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the top 20 transplantation journals by 2024 Scimago Journal Rank. Editor gender, specialty, geographic location, and journal characteristics were extracted from public sources. Gender was determined through web searches and validated software. Female representation among editors-in-chief in 2024 was compared to 2014. Predictors of female editorship were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.
    RESULTS: Of 1479 editors, 31% were female, including 3/24 (13%) editors-in-chief and 29/90 (32%) chief/deputy editors. Female editors-in-chief was unchanged from 2014 to 2024 (10% vs 13%, p = .99). Physicians comprised 80% of editors, with lower female representation than non-physicians (28% vs 46%, p < .001). Female editorship was lowest among surgeons (16%) and highest in allied health (77%). Most editors (94%) were from high-income countries, with no difference between high- and middle-income countries (p = .99), and none from low-income countries. Odds of female editorship were lower for surgeons (OR 0.36; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.49) and higher for allied health (OR: 6.50; 95% CI: 2.71, 18.1).
    CONCLUSIONS: Female representation on transplant editorial boards aligns with workforce proportions but remains notably lower among editors-in-chief, stable over the past decade. Targeted policies, mentorship, and tracking gender-metrics are critical to promote equity in academic transplantation.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2026.02.018
  8. Front Public Health. 2026 ;14 1767901
    Individual and institutional factors linked to high research productivity among physicians in the Arab Gulf region: implications for healthcare policy.
    Khaldoon Al-Roomi, Amer Almarabheh, Madhawi Albuainain, Rahaf AlMuhanadi, Hessa AlSubaie, Hissa Alabbasi, Fatema Aljowder, Sara Janahi, Salman Alzayani.
       Introduction: Although physicians' research productivity contributes to evidence-based practice and health-system learning, productivity is uneven, and little is known about individual-level traits linked with high output in Arab Gulf settings. This study examined physician characteristics associated with higher scientific publication productivity in Bahrain.
    Methods: Cross-sectional study of practicing physicians in Bahrain across primary and secondary healthcare and government/private sectors. Data included age, gender, years of experience, career level, sector and care setting, and lifetime number of peer-reviewed publications. High productivity was defined as ≥5 publications. Associations were examined using chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression (SPSS v30.0).
    Results: In total, 239 physicians were responded to the survey (mean age 37.58 ± 11.15 years; 66.5% female; 75.3% government sector; 71.1% secondary care). One in five (≈20%) reported ≥5 publications, while about one-third had none. In univariate analyses, higher productivity was associated with male gender, age ≥40 years, ≥15 years' experience, advanced career level, and secondary practice (all p ≤ 0.001). In multivariable modelling, adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were produced for employment in secondary healthcare remained strongly associated with high productivity (OR 7.364, 95% CI 1.992, 27.225; p = 0.003). Employment in the private sector was associated with lower odds compared with government sector (OR 0.634, 95% CI 0.259, 1.553; p = 0.319). Female gender showed a trend toward lower odds compared to their male counterparts (OR 0.449, 95% CI 0.197, 1.024; p = 0.057).
    Discussion: Research productivity among physicians in Bahrain is concentrated in a small, predominantly male, at advanced career stages and hospital-based doctors, suggesting structural and career-stage inequities in research engagement. An urgent need exists within the healthcare system for a more inclusive research culture that spans primary and secondary healthcare, government and private sectors, and male and female physicians alike.
    Keywords:  Arab Gulf; Bahrain; gender disparities; healthcare policy; physicians; research productivity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1767901
  9. Br Dent J. 2026 Mar 06.
    Socioeconomic determinants of the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Shanghai global ranking of dental schools.
    Ratilal Lalloo.
      Aims An analysis of the ranking of dental schools has received limited attention. The aim of this research was to analyse the geographic distribution and socio-economic determinants of the rankings of dental schools.Methods The recent Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Shanghai rankings were analysed for the distribution of dental schools by country, region and income group. The ranking indicator scores were compared by ranking group (top 25; 26-50 and 51+) and matched with the distribution of the top 2% of highly cited dental scientists. Country-level socio-development indicators were compared for countries with a ranked school, no ranked school and no school.Results In the QS and Shanghai rankings, 63% and 75% of schools were in Europe and North America, respectively. Almost all schools (>90%) were in high-income countries. For QS ranking, scores for academic and employment reputation differed by ranking group; however, citation and H-index were similar. For Shanghai ranking, world-class faculty, world-class output and high-quality research scores differed; however, research impact and international collaboration did not. Research and development expenditure was on average 2% for countries with a ranked school, 0.7% for countries with no ranked school and 0.3% for countries with no school.Conclusion Being a highly ranked dental school may be reflection of privilege rather than quality. The rankings are biased to research metrics and reputation, rather than the quality of the teaching of oral health professionals.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-025-9301-3
  10. An Pediatr (Engl Ed). 2026 Feb;pii: S2341-2879(26)00002-5. [Epub ahead of print]104(2): 504026
    Research and scientific publication in Pediatrics in Spain.
    José Manuel Moreno Villares.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpede.2026.504026
  11. Account Res. 2026 Mar 05. 2640012
    Gaming the peer review system: Evidence for a review mill in medicine highlights the need to ensure reviewer integrity.
    M Ángeles Oviedo-García, René Aquarius, Dorothy V M Bishop.
       BACKGROUND: Review mills are recognized when individuals generate numerous generic review reports, typically containing suggestions for citations to their own work. Here, we report a network with characteristics of a review mill in the field of gynecological oncology.
    METHODS: Our search started with a review that contained "boilerplate" comments as well as suggestions that specific PubMed IDs be cited. We searched the internet using Google for review reports using the same boilerplate comments. We coded text to quantify similarities between reviews and compiled citations suggested by reviewers. For comparison, we analyzed 59 reviews of the same articles by other peer reviewers.
    RESULTS: We identified a network of 195 review reports that shared boilerplate text from 170 articles. One hundred and eighty-six reports suggested citing articles coauthored by a member of the network. Five members of the network had editorial roles. Authors of 142 articles complied with suggestions for citation. Boilerplate text and citation recommendations were rare in the comparison reports.
    CONCLUSIONS: Review mills lead to articles being published without proper peer review. This is of particular concern in medical research. Open peer review and transparent reporting of the editors responsible for handling papers will make it easier to detect review mills.
    Keywords:  Peer review; editors; research integrity; reviewer network
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2640012
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2026‒03‒18 at 0:32.