The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences (MJMS) would like to present a brief report of its progress in 2018 with a purpose to provide a clear picture of how it has performed so far. This report may considered as a helpful information, especially, to future authors who wish to submit their articles to MJMS. This report summarised the information of the total of original manuscripts received based on manuscript type, authors' country of origin and total of original manuscripts received by month. It also reveals the statistics of the final decisions made based on manuscript type, the accept-reject ratio by the editor and the time taken from submission to decision for all manuscripts submitted throughout 2018.
Each year the British Journal of Biomedical Science publishes a 'What have we learned' editorial designed to introduce readers within the major disciplines of laboratory medicine to developments outside their immediate area. In addition it is designed to inform a wider readership of the advances in the diagnosis and treatment of disease. To this end, in 2020 the journal published 39 articles covering the disciplines within Biomedical Science in the 4 issues comprising volume 77. These included a review of COVID-19 in this issue, 27 original articles, 6 Biomedical Science 'In Brief' and 4 case histories. 27 of the articles involved molecular techniques, with one of these comparing results with a mass spectrometry based method. The preponderance of molecular genetic studies gives us a good idea of the likely future direction of the disciplines.
This editorial aims to report on the performance of the Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences (MJMS) in the year 2016. The performance report is based on an analysis of the auto-generated data compiled from the ScholarOne Manuscripts™. It will specifically focus on the pattern of manuscript submission, geographical distribution of contributors, manuscript submission by month and the acceptance-rejection rate of post-review manuscripts. It will also discuss the effects of the decision to raise the article acceptance standards. The MJMS would also like to share the news of its receipt of the 2016 Current Research in Malaysia (CREAM) award. This honour was bestowed upon us by the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) of Malaysia, on November 1, 2016.
Conflicts of interest in medicine has created deep concerns about the integrity of medicine and raised doubts about the trustworthiness of the medical professional. New stories of conflict of interest in medicine have become a commonplace. The interactions between the medical professional and the biomedical device as well as the pharmaceutical industry has become so pervasive that the primary interest of the medical professional in protecting and promoting the welfare of the patient has been compromised. The professional judgement and actions have been influenced by secondary interests, the major fungible and quantifiable being financial interest. The industry influence not only affects the way we practice orthopaedics but also affects medical education and peer review publications. Peer review publications have been shown to exaggerate benefits of the industry products while at the same time downplaying the risks. These conflicts of interest in orthopaedic surgery are particularly common in spinal and joint replacement surgery where joint replacement has been described as a ‘fashion trade’. The introduction of new products appears to be an uncontrolled experiment which has been hijacked by large corporations. This article explores the unhealthy pervasive interaction between the orthopaedic surgeon and the medical devices as well as the pharmaceutical industry. It highlights how the biomedical and the pharmaceutical industry dominate all aspects of the healthcare system. With its wealth and political clout, its influence is present everywhere, from the use of devices and drugs, research, publications, trials, education and even formulation of CGPs.
In recent years, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of predatory journals has increased significantly. Predatory journals exploit the "open-access model" by engaging in deceptive practices such as charging high publication fees without providing the expected quality and performing insufficient or no peer review. Such behaviors undermine the integrity of scientific research and can result in researchers having trouble identifying reputable publication opportunities, particularly early-career researchers who struggle to understand and establish the correct criteria for publication in reputable journals. Publishing in journals that do not fully cover the criteria for scientific publication is also an ethical issue. This review aimed to describe the characteristics of predatory journals, differentiate between reliable and predatory journals, investigate the reasons that lead researchers to publish in predatory journals, evaluate the negative impact of predatory publications on the scientific community, and explore future perspectives. The authors also provide some considerations for researchers (particularly early-career researchers) when selecting journals for publication, explaining the role of metrics, databases, and artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation, with a specific focus on and relevance to publication in veterinary medicine.
Publishing is a hallmark of good scientific research. The aim of publishing is to disseminate new research knowledge and findings as widely as possible in a timely and efficient manner. Scientific publishing has evolved over the years with the advent of new technologies and demands. This paper presents a brief discussion on the history and status of electronic publishing. The Open Access Initiative was created with the aim of overcoming various limitations faced by traditional publishing access models. Innovations have opened up possibilities for electronic publishing to increase the accessibility, visibility, interactivity and usability of research. A glimpse of the future publishing landscape has revealed that scientific communication and research will not remain the same. The internet and advances in information technology will have an impact on the research landscape, scholarly publishing, research policy and funding, dissemination of knowledge, and the progress of science as a whole.
Background: The state of palliative care research is closely linked to the development of palliative care services in a country or region. Objective: To systematically review the current state of palliative care research in the Asia Pacific region and analyze its relationship with the performance of each country in the region on the Economist Intelligence Unit's 2015 Quality of Death Index. Design: Systematic review and bibliographic analysis in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol 2015 (PRISMA-P). Data Sources: The PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and PsychiNFO databases were searched on February 4, 2018. Results: One thousand six hundred sixty-seven articles were reviewed. Eighteen out of 32 countries in the region published research. Around 74.15% (1236) of the articles were produced by high-income countries. Research output (articles per 1 m population) was closely linked to country performance on the Economist Intelligence Unit's 2015 Quality of Death Index (adjusted R2= 0.85). Palliative care research in the region is overwhelmingly focused on cancer (80.13% of articles reviewed). The most common themes of research were "palliative care service (24.45%)" and "clinical" (15.38%). Conclusions: Palliative care research in the region is growing but remains largely centered on the high-income countries, with many low- and middle-income countries having little published research output. Much work is required to drive research in these countries to generate the evidence required for the development of palliative care services. The emphasis on cancer in research also indicates that the needs of patients suffering from noncancer-related diseases may be neglected.
This communication analyzed research publications in dentistry in the Institute of Scientific Information Web of Science databases of 10 dental faculties in the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) from 2000 to 2009. The term used for the "all-document types" search was "Faculty of Dentistry/College of Dentistry." Abstracts presented at regional meetings were also included in the analysis. The Times Higher Education System QS World University Rankings showed that universities in the region fare poorly in world university rankings. Only the National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University appeared in the top 100 in 2009; 19 universities in the region, including Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand, appeared in the top 500. Data from the databases showed that research publications by dental institutes in the region fall short of their Asian counterparts. Singapore and Thailand are the most active in dental research of the ASEAN countries.