Suppr超能文献

作者单位关系不当的描述:一项探索性案例研究的方案。

Author misrepresentation of institutional affiliations: protocol for an exploratory case study.

机构信息

Facultad de Ciencias Médicas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 22;9(2):e023983. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023983.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

University ranking systems and the publish-or-perish dictum, among other factors, are driving universities and researchers around the world to increase their research productivity. Authors frequently report multiple affiliations in published articles. It is not known if the reported institutional affiliations are real affiliations, which is when the universities have contributed substantially to the research conducted and to the published manuscript. This study aims to establish whether there is an empirical basis for author affiliation misrepresentation in authors with multiple institutional affiliations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This individual secondary data exploratory analysis on Scopus-indexed articles for 2016 will search all authors who report multiple institutional affiliations in which at least one of the affiliations is to a Chilean university. We will consider that misrepresentation of an affiliation is more likely when it is not possible to verify objectively a link between the author and the mentioned institution through institutional websites. If we cannot corroborate the author affiliation, we will consider this a finding of potential misrepresentation of the affiliation. We will summarise results with descriptive statistics.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was approved by the institutional ethics committee of Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Resolution No. 261, and dated January 15, 2018. Results will be submitted to the World Conference on Research Integrity, among other meetings on publication ethics and research integrity, and will be published in scientific, peer-reviewed journals.

摘要

简介

大学排名系统和“发表或灭亡”的原则等因素,促使世界各地的大学和研究人员提高他们的研究生产力。作者在已发表的文章中经常报告多个机构隶属关系。目前尚不清楚报告的机构隶属关系是否是真实的隶属关系,即大学是否为开展的研究和发表的手稿做出了实质性的贡献。本研究旨在确定在具有多个机构隶属关系的作者中,作者隶属关系的虚假陈述是否有实际依据。

方法和分析

本项针对 2016 年 Scopus 索引文章的个体二次数据探索性分析将搜索所有报告多个机构隶属关系的作者,其中至少有一个隶属关系是智利的一所大学。当通过机构网站无法客观验证作者与所提到的机构之间的联系时,我们将认为隶属关系的虚假陈述更有可能发生。如果我们无法证实作者的隶属关系,我们将认为这是隶属关系潜在虚假陈述的发现。我们将用描述性统计对结果进行总结。

伦理和传播

该研究方案已获得智利圣地亚哥大学机构伦理委员会的批准,决议号为 261,并于 2018 年 1 月 15 日生效。研究结果将提交给世界研究诚信大会,以及其他关于出版道德和研究诚信的会议,并将在科学同行评议期刊上发表。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9c48/6398759/c7c725ead588/bmjopen-2018-023983f01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验