Limits...
A Critical Look at Biomedical Journals' Policies on Animal Research by Use of a Novel Tool: The EXEMPLAR Scale.

Martins AR, Franco NH - Animals (Basel) (2015)

Bottom Line: For editorial policies to meaningfully impact attitudes and practice, they must not only be put into effect by editors and reviewers, but also be set to high standards.Results show a much greater focus of editorial policies on regulatory compliance than on other domains, suggesting a transfer of journals' responsibilities to scientists, institutions and regulators.Scores were not found to vary with journals' impact factor, country of origin or antiquity, but were, however, significantly higher for open access journals, which may be a result of their greater exposure and consequent higher public scrutiny.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre S/N, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal. up201101588@fc.up.pt.

ABSTRACT
Animal research is not only regulated by legislation but also by self-regulatory mechanisms within the scientific community, which include biomedical journals' policies on animal use. For editorial policies to meaningfully impact attitudes and practice, they must not only be put into effect by editors and reviewers, but also be set to high standards. We present a novel tool to classify journals' policies on animal use-the EXEMPLAR scale-as well as an analysis by this scale of 170 journals publishing studies on animal models of three human diseases: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Type-1 Diabetes and Tuberculosis. Results show a much greater focus of editorial policies on regulatory compliance than on other domains, suggesting a transfer of journals' responsibilities to scientists, institutions and regulators. Scores were not found to vary with journals' impact factor, country of origin or antiquity, but were, however, significantly higher for open access journals, which may be a result of their greater exposure and consequent higher public scrutiny.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Topics covered by the journals in the sample (of the three selected). Journals publishing studies in more than one of the selected fields (n = 18) included two journals publishing papers on T1D and ALS, one journal publishing on Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Tuberculosis (TB), ten journals publishing on both T1D and TB and five journals publishing papers on all three fields, between 2011–2013.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494415&req=5

animals-05-00315-f002: Topics covered by the journals in the sample (of the three selected). Journals publishing studies in more than one of the selected fields (n = 18) included two journals publishing papers on T1D and ALS, one journal publishing on Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Tuberculosis (TB), ten journals publishing on both T1D and TB and five journals publishing papers on all three fields, between 2011–2013.

Mentions: The total sample comprised 170 journals, published by 54 academic publishers, with headquarters in 20 countries. Four publishers were responsible for publishing nearly half (49%) of the retrieved journals, namely Elsevier (36 journals), Wiley-Blackwell (22 journals), Springer (13 journals) and Nature Publishing Group (12 journals). Regarding country of origin, 95% of all journals were either based in the EU (81/170, 47 of which in the United Kingdom and 11 in the Netherlands) or the United States of America (USA) (80/170). The mean impact factor of the journals in this sample was 4.79 (Median = 3.63; Standard Deviation = 3.85). The median year of publication of first issue was 1987, with 75% of journals preceding 2002. Figure 2 represents the distribution of journals by field of research (of the three fields reviewed for this present study).


A Critical Look at Biomedical Journals' Policies on Animal Research by Use of a Novel Tool: The EXEMPLAR Scale.

Martins AR, Franco NH - Animals (Basel) (2015)

Topics covered by the journals in the sample (of the three selected). Journals publishing studies in more than one of the selected fields (n = 18) included two journals publishing papers on T1D and ALS, one journal publishing on Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Tuberculosis (TB), ten journals publishing on both T1D and TB and five journals publishing papers on all three fields, between 2011–2013.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494415&req=5

animals-05-00315-f002: Topics covered by the journals in the sample (of the three selected). Journals publishing studies in more than one of the selected fields (n = 18) included two journals publishing papers on T1D and ALS, one journal publishing on Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Tuberculosis (TB), ten journals publishing on both T1D and TB and five journals publishing papers on all three fields, between 2011–2013.
Mentions: The total sample comprised 170 journals, published by 54 academic publishers, with headquarters in 20 countries. Four publishers were responsible for publishing nearly half (49%) of the retrieved journals, namely Elsevier (36 journals), Wiley-Blackwell (22 journals), Springer (13 journals) and Nature Publishing Group (12 journals). Regarding country of origin, 95% of all journals were either based in the EU (81/170, 47 of which in the United Kingdom and 11 in the Netherlands) or the United States of America (USA) (80/170). The mean impact factor of the journals in this sample was 4.79 (Median = 3.63; Standard Deviation = 3.85). The median year of publication of first issue was 1987, with 75% of journals preceding 2002. Figure 2 represents the distribution of journals by field of research (of the three fields reviewed for this present study).

Bottom Line: For editorial policies to meaningfully impact attitudes and practice, they must not only be put into effect by editors and reviewers, but also be set to high standards.Results show a much greater focus of editorial policies on regulatory compliance than on other domains, suggesting a transfer of journals' responsibilities to scientists, institutions and regulators.Scores were not found to vary with journals' impact factor, country of origin or antiquity, but were, however, significantly higher for open access journals, which may be a result of their greater exposure and consequent higher public scrutiny.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre S/N, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal. up201101588@fc.up.pt.

ABSTRACT
Animal research is not only regulated by legislation but also by self-regulatory mechanisms within the scientific community, which include biomedical journals' policies on animal use. For editorial policies to meaningfully impact attitudes and practice, they must not only be put into effect by editors and reviewers, but also be set to high standards. We present a novel tool to classify journals' policies on animal use-the EXEMPLAR scale-as well as an analysis by this scale of 170 journals publishing studies on animal models of three human diseases: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Type-1 Diabetes and Tuberculosis. Results show a much greater focus of editorial policies on regulatory compliance than on other domains, suggesting a transfer of journals' responsibilities to scientists, institutions and regulators. Scores were not found to vary with journals' impact factor, country of origin or antiquity, but were, however, significantly higher for open access journals, which may be a result of their greater exposure and consequent higher public scrutiny.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus