搜索结果：Open veterinary journal

In recent years, increased stakeholder pressure to transition research to Open Access has led to many journals converting, or 'flipping', from a closed access (CA) to an open access (OA) publishing model. Changing the publishing model can influence the decision of authors to submit their papers to a journal, and increased article accessibility may influence citation behaviour. In this paper we aimed to understand how flipping a journal to an OA model influences the journal's future publication volumes and citation impact. We analysed two independent sets of journals that had flipped to an OA model, one from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and one from the Open Access Directory (OAD), and compared their development with two respective control groups of similar journals. For bibliometric analyses, journals were matched to the Scopus database. We assessed changes in the number of articles published over time, as well as two citation metrics at the journal and article level: the normalised impact factor (IF) and the average relative citations (ARC), respectively. Our results show that overall, journals that flipped to an OA model increased their publication output compared

It is shown that the calculation of scientometric indicators of the scientist and also the scientific journal continues to be an actual problem nowadays. It is revealed that the leading scientometric databases have the capabilities of automated metadata collection from the scientific journal website by the use of specialized electronic document management systems, in particular Open Journal Systems. It is established that Open Journal Systems successfully exports metadata about an article from scientific journals to scientometric databases Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. However, there is no standard method of export from Open Journal Systems to such scientometric databases as the Russian Science Citation Index and Index Copernicus, which determined the need for research. The aim of the study is to develop the plug-in to the Open Journal Systems for the export of data from this system to scientometric database Russian Science Citation Index. As a result of the study, an infological model for exporting metadata from Open Journal Systems to the Russian Science Citation Index was proposed. The SirenExpo plug-in was developed to export data from Open Journal Systems to the R

Many scholarly societies face challenges in adapting their publishing to an open access model where neither authors nor readers pay any fees. Some have argued that one of the main barriers is the actual cost of publishing. The goal of this paper is to show that the actual costs can be extremely low while still maintaining scholarly quality. We accomplish this by building a journal publishing workflow that minimizes the amount of required human labor. We recently built a software system for this and launched a journal using the system, and we estimate estimate our cost to publish this journal is approximately \$705 per year, plus \$1 per article and about 10 minutes of volunteer labor per article. We benefited from two factors, namely the fact that authors in our discipline use LaTeX to prepare their manuscripts, and we had volunteer labor to develop software and run the journal. We have made most of this software open source in the hopes that it can help others.

In recent years, increased stakeholder pressure to transition research to Open Access has led to many journals "flipping" from a toll access to an open access publishing model. Changing the publishing model can influence the decision of authors to submit their papers to a journal, and increased article accessibility may influence citation behaviour. The aim of this paper is to show changes in the number of published articles and citations after the flipping of a journal. We analysed a set of 171 journals in the Web of Science (WoS) which flipped to open access. In addition to comparing the number of articles, average relative citation (ARC) and normalized impact factor (IF) are applied, respectively, as bibliometric indicators at the article and journal level, to trace the transformation of flipped journals covered. Our results show that flipping mostly has had positive effects on journal's IF. But it has had no obvious citation advantage for the articles. We also see a decline in the number of published articles after flipping. We can conclude that flipping to open access can improve the performance of journals, despite decreasing the tendency of authors to submit their articles a

This paper reviews research literature on Diamond Open Access (DOA) journals - sometimes also called Platinum Open Access - that was produced after this journal segment started to become a priority in European research policy around 2020. It contextualizes the current science policy debate, critically examines different understandings of DOA, and reviews studies on the role of such journals in scholarly communication. Most existing research consists of quantitative studies focusing on aspects such as the number of DOA journals, their publication output, the diversity of the landscape in terms of subject areas, languages, publishing entities, indexing in major databases, awareness and perception among scholars, cost analyses, as well as insights into the internal operations of DOA journals. The review shows that research on DOA journals is partly influenced by the science policy discourse in at least two ways: first, through the normativity inherent in that discourse, and second, through the temporality of policy-driven research of practical relevance, which leaves important aspects of the phenomenon understudied. Moreover, research on the DOA journal landscape has implications beyo

Predatory journals are Open Access journals of highly questionable scientific quality. Such journals pretend to use peer review for quality assurance, and spam academics with requests for submissions, in order to collect author payments. In recent years predatory journals have received a lot of negative media. While much has been said about the harm that such journals cause to academic publishing in general, an overlooked aspect is how much articles in such journals are actually read and in particular cited, that is if they have any significant impact on the research in their fields. Other studies have already demonstrated that only some of the articles in predatory journals contain faulty and directly harmful results, while a lot of the articles present mediocre and poorly reported studies. We studied citation statistics over a five-year period in Google Scholar for 250 random articles published in such journals in 2014, and found an average of 2,6 citations per article and that 60 % of the articles had no citations at all. For comparison a random sample of articles published in the approximately 25,000 peer reviewed journals included in the Scopus index had an average of 18,1 cit

This study examines the social media uptake of scientific journals on two different platforms - X and WeChat - by comparing the adoption of X among journals indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) with the adoption of WeChat among journals indexed in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD). The findings reveal substantial differences in platform adoption and user engagement, shaped by local contexts. While only 22.7% of SCIE journals maintain an X account, 84.4% of CSCD journals have a WeChat official account. Journals in Life Sciences & Biomedicine lead in uptake on both platforms, whereas those in Technology and Physical Sciences show high WeChat uptake but comparatively lower presence on X. User engagement on both platforms is dominated by low-effort interactions rather than more conversational behaviors. Correlation analyses indicate weak-to-moderate relationships between bibliometric indicators and social media metrics, confirming that online engagement reflects a distinct dimension of journal impact, whether on an international or a local platform. These findings underscore the need for broader social media metric frameworks that incorporate locally dom

This paper describes the growth of Open Access (OA) repositories and journals as reported by monitoring initiatives such as ROAR (Registry of Open Access Repositories), Open DOAR (Open Directory of Open Access Repositories), DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), Directory of Web Ranking of World Repositories by the Cybermetrics Laboratory in Spain and published literature. The performance of Malaysian OA repositories and journals is highlighted. The strength of OA channels in increasing visibility and citations are evidenced by research findings. It is proposed that libraries champion OA initiatives by making university or institutional governance aware; encouraging institutional journal publishers to adopt OA platform; collaborating with research groups to jumpstart OA institutional initiatives and to embed OA awareness into user and researcher education programmes. By actively involved, libraries will be free of permission, licensing and archiving barriers usually imposed in traditional publishing situation.

This paper introduces the Unique Citing Documents Journal Impact Factor(Uniq-JIF) as a supplement to the traditional Journal Impact Factor(JIF). The Uniq-JIF counts each citing document only once, aiming to reduce the effects of citation manipulations. Analysis of 2023 Journal Citation Reports data shows that for most journals, the Uniq-JIF is less than 20% lower than the JIF, though some journals show a drop of over 75%. The Uniq-JIF also highlights significant reductions for journals suppressed due to citation issues, indicating its effectiveness in identifying problematic journals. The Uniq-JIF offers a more nuanced view of a journal's influence and can help reveal journals needing further scrutiny.

The preservation of the scholarly record has been a point of concern since the beginning of knowledge production. With print publications, the responsibility rested primarily with librarians, but the shift toward digital publishing and, in particular, the introduction of open access (OA) have caused ambiguity and complexity. Consequently, the long-term accessibility of journals is not always guaranteed, and they can even disappear from the web completely. The focus of this exploratory study is on the phenomenon of vanished journals, something that has not been carried out before. For the analysis, we consulted several major bibliographic indexes, such as Scopus, Ulrichsweb, and the Directory of Open Access Journals, and traced the journals through the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. We found 174 OA journals that, through lack of comprehensive and open archives, vanished from the web between 2000 and 2019, spanning all major research disciplines and geographic regions of the world. Our results raise vital concern for the integrity of the scholarly record and highlight the urgency to take collaborative action to ensure continued access and prevent the loss of more scholarly knowl

Overlay journals are characterised by their articles being published on open access repositories, often already starting in their initial preprint form as a prerequisite for submission to the journal prior to initiating the peer-review process. In this study we aimed to identify currently active overlay journals and examine their characteristics. We utilised an explorative web search and contacted key service providers for additional information. The final sample consisted of 34 overlay journals. While the results show that new overlay journals have been actively established within recent years, the current presence of overlay journals remains diminutive compared to the overall number of open access journals. Most overlay journals publish articles in natural sciences, mathematics or computer sciences, and are commonly published by groups of academics rather than formal organisations. They may also rank highly within the traditional journal citation metrics. None of the investigated journals required fees from authors, which is likely related to the cost-effective aspects of the overlay publishing model. Both the growth in adoption of open access preprint repositories and researcher

We comment on a recent article by Laakso et al. (arXiv:2008.11933 [cs.DL]), in which the disappearance of 176 open access journals from the Internet is noted. We argue that one reason these journals may have vanished is that they were predatory journals. The de-listing of predators from the Directory of Open Access Journals in 2014 and the abundance of predatory journals and awareness thereof in North America parsimoniously explain the temporal and geographic patterns Laakso et al. observed.

We compare the network of aggregated journal-journal citation relations provided by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2012 of the Science and Social Science Citation Indexes (SCI and SSCI) with similar data based on Scopus 2012. First, global maps were developed for the two sets separately; sets of documents can then be compared using overlays to both maps. Using fuzzy-string matching and ISSN numbers, we were able to match 10,524 journal names between the two sets; that is, 96.4% of the 10,936 journals contained in JCR or 51.2% of the 20,554 journals covered by Scopus. Network analysis was then pursued on the set of journals shared between the two databases and the two sets of unique journals. Citations among the shared journals are more comprehensively covered in JCR than Scopus, so the network in JCR is denser and more connected than in Scopus. The ranking of shared journals in terms of indegree (that is, numbers of citing journals) or total citations is similar in both databases overall (Spearman's \r{ho} > 0.97), but some individual journals rank very differently. Journals that are unique to Scopus seem to be less important--they are citing shared journals rather than bein

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in clinical settings, yet their performance in veterinary medicine remains underexplored. We evaluated three commercially available veterinary-focused LLM summarization tools (Product 1 [Hachiko] and Products 2 and 3) on a standardized dataset of veterinary oncology records. Using a rubric-guided LLM-as-a-judge framework, summaries were scored across five domains: Factual Accuracy, Completeness, Chronological Order, Clinical Relevance, and Organization. Product 1 achieved the highest overall performance, with a median average score of 4.61 (IQR: 0.73), compared to 2.55 (IQR: 0.78) for Product 2 and 2.45 (IQR: 0.92) for Product 3. It also received perfect median scores in Factual Accuracy and Chronological Order. To assess the internal consistency of the grading framework itself, we repeated the evaluation across three independent runs. The LLM grader demonstrated high reproducibility, with Average Score standard deviations of 0.015 (Product 1), 0.088 (Product 2), and 0.034 (Product 3). These findings highlight the importance of veterinary-specific commercial LLM tools and demonstrate that LLM-as-a-judge evaluation is a scalable and

The effects of Open Access (OA) upon journal performance are investigated. The key research question holds: How does the citation impact and publication output of journals switching ('flipping') from non-OA to Gold-OA develop after their switch to Gold-OA? A review is given of the literature, with an emphasis on studies dealing with flipping journals. Two study sets with 119 and 100 flipping journals, derived from two different OA data sources (DOAJ and OAD), are compared with two control groups, one based on a standard bibliometric criterion, and a second controlling for a journal's national orientation. Comparing post-switch indicators with pre-switch ones in paired T-tests, evidence was obtained of an OA Citation advantage but not of an OA Publication Advantage. Shifts in the affiliation countries of publishing and citing authors are characterized in terms of countries' income class and geographical world region. Suggestions are made for qualitative follow-up studies to obtain more insight into OA flipping or reverse-flipping

ChatGPT, the most accessible generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool, offers considerable potential for veterinary medicine, yet a dedicated review of its specific applications is lacking. This review concisely synthesizes the latest research and practical applications of ChatGPT within the clinical, educational, and research domains of veterinary medicine. It intends to provide specific guidance and actionable examples of how generative AI can be directly utilized by veterinary professionals without a programming background. For practitioners, ChatGPT can extract patient data, generate progress notes, and potentially assist in diagnosing complex cases. Veterinary educators can create custom GPTs for student support, while students can utilize ChatGPT for exam preparation. ChatGPT can aid in academic writing tasks in research, but veterinary publishers have set specific requirements for authors to follow. Despite its transformative potential, careful use is essential to avoid pitfalls like hallucination. This review addresses ethical considerations, provides learning resources, and offers tangible examples to guide responsible implementation. Carefully selected, up-to-date lin

Veterinary medical records represent a large data resource for application to veterinary and One Health clinical research efforts. Use of the data is limited by interoperability challenges including inconsistent data formats and data siloing. Clinical coding using standardized medical terminologies enhances the quality of medical records and facilitates their interoperability with veterinary and human health records from other sites. Previous studies, such as DeepTag and VetTag, evaluated the application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) to automate veterinary diagnosis coding, employing long short-term memory (LSTM) and transformer models to infer a subset of Systemized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) diagnosis codes from free-text clinical notes. This study expands on these efforts by incorporating all 7,739 distinct SNOMED-CT diagnosis codes recognized by the Colorado State University (CSU) Veterinary Teaching Hospital (VTH) and by leveraging the increasing availability of pre-trained language models (LMs). 13 freely-available pre-trained LMs were fine-tuned on the free-text notes from 246,473 manually-coded veterinary patient visits included in the CSU

Scientific journal publishers have over the past twenty-five years rapidly converted to predominantly electronic dissemination, but the reader-pays business model continues to dominate the market. Open Access (OA) publishing, where the articles are freely readable on the net, has slowly increased its market share to near 20%, but has failed to fulfill the visions of rapid proliferation predicted by many early proponents. The growth of OA has also been very uneven across fields of science. We report market shares of open access in eighteen Scopus-indexed disciplines ranging from 27% (agriculture) to 7% (business). The differences become far more pronounced for journals published in the four countries, which dominate commercial scholarly publishing (US, UK, Germany and the Netherlands). We present contrasting developments within six academic disciplines. Availability of funding to pay publication charges, pressure from research funding agencies, and the diversity of discipline-specific research communication cultures arise as potential explanations for the observed differences.

Rankings of scholarly journals based on citation data are often met with skepticism by the scientific community. Part of the skepticism is due to disparity between the common perception of journals' prestige and their ranking based on citation counts. A more serious concern is the inappropriate use of journal rankings to evaluate the scientific influence of authors. This paper focuses on analysis of the table of cross-citations among a selection of Statistics journals. Data are collected from the Web of Science database published by Thomson Reuters. Our results suggest that modelling the exchange of citations between journals is useful to highlight the most prestigious journals, but also that journal citation data are characterized by considerable heterogeneity, which needs to be properly summarized. Inferential conclusions require care in order to avoid potential over-interpretation of insignificant differences between journal ratings. Comparison with published ratings of institutions from the UK's Research Assessment Exercise shows strong correlation at aggregate level between assessed research quality and journal citation `export scores' within the discipline of Statistics.