DOCSLIB.ORG

AVES Harnesses the Power of Publons Case

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AVES Harnesses the Power of Publons Case Case study | AVES AVES harnesses the power of Publons How investing in peer review helped an independent publisher’s journals succeed AVES is an Istanbul-based publisher of academic journals mainly in the field of "We are a team of 15 medicine and social sciences, in accordance with international guidelines. Through people and our goal its experienced team of experts and partnerships with numerous universities, is to make sure that learned societies, and other non-profit organisations, AVES publishes more than the journals we publish 30 open access journals as of 2020. are author-friendly, The organisation’s primary goal is to help their clients improve their journals to become reviewer-friendly high-impact publications, that are well accepted by the international academic and that they have a community in their respective field. considerable impact Structuring their clients’ editorial workflow and advising on their journal’s peer review in their field." processes is an integral part of AVES’ services. For this, they have been relying on Clarivate’s solutions for the past 10 years. Ali Sahin, Publications Director, AVES The challenge AVES wanted to ensure timely publication of their journals – a way to speed up the preview process to help AVES needed an easier way to find and researchers meet their maximum potential. incentivise reviewers to work with them. AVES needed to protect their strong It was becoming increasingly difficult community of journals and authors. for AVES to find motivated, reliable and available peer reviewers. “If you speed up the peer-review process, you make authors happy, and Before Publons™, journal editors would look for if authors are happy, they will bring reviewers via search engines such as PubMed. in more quality papers” says Ali. This was a time-consuming process as editors had to scan through each paper in order to find the author’s contact information. This took away the editor’s focus from other tasks "In the past, related to the management of the journals. our clients tried With the rapid growth in submissions to scholarly journals, AVES became aware a number of ways of the increasing demand for a peer reviewer’s time and effort and realised to motivate peer that not taking action would threaten their client’s ability to deliver impactful and reviewers. None trusted research quickly and efficiently. of which worked." How to recognise a reviewer for their hard work, dedication and expertise remained an issue that AVES needed a solution for. Ali Sahin, Publications Director, AVES The solution For reviewers who opt-in to the service, their Publons profile is automatically updated with a verified record of the review performed, in full AVES partnered with Publons in 2018 to help compliance with the journal’s editorial policies improve the quality and efficiency of their and without revealing any sensitive information. peer review processes for 17 of their journals. By subscribing to Reviewer Connect and To extend touch points with reviewers and Reviewer Recognition Service, they were increase engagement, Publons notifies able to take a more proactive approach to reviewers when and where the paper they finding reviewers, improving the reviewer reviewed is published, pointing them to experience and building more effective the article on the journal’s platform. relationships with the community. The tool also makes it possible to Reviewer Connect enables AVES to: recognise past reviews and engage with past peer reviewers. • Perform powerful searches: Publons’ algorithm trawls the extensive Web of AVES actively uses the partner dashboard Science™ publication and citation index, to monitor the performance of their and Publons' exclusive review database to Publons partnership, track reviewer return up to 30 precise recommendations uptake and satisfaction with the service from over 7-million authors. Editors are and leverage unique insights and analytics now able to search using parameters about their reviewers’ preferences, such as title, abstract, journal name, demographics, and behaviour. authors and exclude researchers. • Get a 360° view of suggested reviewers: The tool enables editors to choose the right "We started to use review candidates based on publications matched to search, research fields, Reviewer Connect biography and institutional affiliations, current availability to review and more. and Reviewer • Reliably contact prospective reviewers: Recognition to help Journals now have access to a researcher’s latest contact email address from Web us with our main of Science, as well as one-click access to trusted sources for contact information. challenges of a) Reviewer Recognition Service offers finding the right reviewers a way to effortlessly track and verify all their peer review contributions reviewer and b) for participating journals. Reviewers now receive a “Thank you for reviewing” incentivising them." email from the editorial office that includes an offer to get recognition on Publons for their valuable work. Ali Sahin, Publications Director, AVES The value Helped improve the quality of papers. Authors of journals started receiving better Easier and quicker to find relevant quality feedback faster, which resulted in and available reviewers. researchers producing better quality content. Through Publons, AVES are able to speed up Reviewer Recognition Service reduces the overall peer review times and get publications amount of time spent looking for reviewers. out faster, improving the experience for The tool became so popular amongst submitting authors. Reviewers not only the community that reviewers started to significantly appreciated the extra recognition pick publishers that had partnered with for their work but also showed a greater such modern solutions, making it easier willingness to review and submit manuscripts for AVES to connect with reviewers and to journals managed by AVES. improve the overall peer review process. Retained clients by reducing “editor burnout”. Created process efficiencies for editors. By investing in a modern peer review solution such as Publons to support their clients, Publons greatly reduces the editor’s AVES saw editors staying longer in their jobs. administrative workload of recruiting “Through our company, journals now have reviewers. Editors of journals with AVES access to a reviewer recognition service. now have more time and capacity to focus It makes our clients happy and we are able on other tasks such as finding better papers to retain them thanks to Publons” says Ali. and improving the quality of the journal in other ways. The reduced time commitment also makes it easier to recruit new editors. The tool makes it easier for smaller teams to manage larger (>1000 submissions) journals while also enabling smaller (<100 submissions) journals to reach 15K out to international researchers. reviewers, 35K reviews (90% increase since partnership with Publons) "We recommend all journals sign up to Publons to manage 41% their peer review uptake rate in 2020 process. It is a must- (+20% year on year) have for journals if they want to provide good quality peer review." 8.7 rating out of 10 for reviewer Ali Sahin, Publications Director, AVES satisfaction in 2020 Learn more about partnering with Publons Publons was first built as a place to help researchers get recognition for their WS561016492 /WS561016492 07 often hidden peer review contributions. To do this we partner with academic publishers to help them give their peer reviewers the recognition they deserve. Publons has a range of peer review solutions designed to help publishers bring greater transparency, recognition, quality, and efficiency to their peer review processes. Publons is partnered with thousands of the world’s scholarly journals. Learn more about our services for publishers here. [email protected] Contact our experts today: +971 4 536 352 (Middle East, North Africa & Turkey) clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup © 2020 Clarivate. Clarivate and its logo, as well as all other trademarks used herein are trademarks of their respective owners and used under license..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Researcher ID/Publons – 2019 Instructions
    Researcher ID/Publons – 2019 Instructions ResearcherID is has now been integrated into the Publons platform: https://publons.com/account/login/. Publons is similar to researcher ID and is a platform which records, verifies, and showcases peer review contributions of researchers. Publons information integrates with Web of Science or records imported from ORCID, EndNote or manual uploads and allows you to track citations to your research outputs that are indexed in Web of Science. Please note that publications that have been manually entered into your Publons from journals outside of Web of Science will not track your citation metrics. Your Account Existing Account If you already have an account for ResearcherID, or Web of Science, you can login at https://publons.com/account/login/ using the same username and password. The publications you previously added into ResearcherID have automatically be added into your Publons account. Create a New Account If you do not already have a ResearcherID, create a Publons account here: https://publons.com/account/register/. You will receive a ResearcherID overnight from Publons that you will be able to use to attach to your publications in Web of Science. Adding Publications Once logged into your account you can load your publications by importing them from Web of Science, ORCID account, EndNote Library or manually using identifiers such as DOI numbers. (Note that citation metrics won't be tracked for records that do not appear in Web of Science). Loading Web of Science publications Select “Publications” under My Records then select “Import Publications” Publons will automatically search Web of Science when you select “Import Publications” for publications that match the email addresses and publishing names you listed in your profile.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploratory Analysis of Publons Metrics and Their Relationship with Bibliometric and Altmetric Impact
    Exploratory analysis of Publons metrics and their relationship with bibliometric and altmetric impact José Luis Ortega Institute for Advanced Social Studies (IESA-CSIC), Córdoba, Spain, [email protected] Abstract Purpose: This study aims to analyse the metrics provided by Publons about the scoring of publications and their relationship with impact measurements (bibliometric and altmetric indicators). Design/methodology/approach: In January 2018, 45,819 research articles were extracted from Publons, including all their metrics (scores, number of pre and post reviews, reviewers, etc.). Using the DOI identifier, other metrics from altmetric providers were gathered to compare the scores of those publications in Publons with their bibliometric and altmetric impact in PlumX, Altmetric.com and Crossref Event Data (CED). Findings: The results show that (1) there are important biases in the coverage of Publons according to disciplines and publishers; (2) metrics from Publons present several problems as research evaluation indicators; and (3) correlations between bibliometric and altmetric counts and the Publons metrics are very weak (r<.2) and not significant. Originality/value: This is the first study about the Publons metrics at article level and their relationship with other quantitative measures such as bibliometric and altmetric indicators. Keywords: Publons, Altmetrics, Bibliometrics, Peer-review 1. Introduction Traditionally, peer-review has been the most appropriate way to validate scientific advances. Since the first beginning of the scientific revolution, scientific theories and discoveries were discussed and agreed by the research community, as a way to confirm and accept new knowledge. This validation process has arrived until our days as a suitable tool for accepting the most relevant manuscripts to academic journals, allocating research funds or selecting and promoting scientific staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Publons for Researchers Final
    Track more of your impact. Own your research identity. Publons Researcher Profiles “In today’s highly competitive research environment, I am frequently asked to demonstrate my impact. But keeping track of all my contributions is tedious, frustrating, and time-consuming. I have grown exhausted with keeping all of the different profiles and tools up-to-date.” Researcher feedback Researcher feedback 2 Track more of your research impact and own your online researcher identity Track your publications, citation metrics, peer reviews, and journal editing work in one, easy-to- maintain profile. ● All your publications, instantly imported from Web of Science, ORCiD, or your bibliographic reference manager (e.g. EndNote Zotero, or Mendeley) ● Trusted citation metrics, automatically imported from the Web of Science Core Collection ● Manage your publication records in Web of Science ● Your verified peer review and journal editing history, powered by partnerships with thousands of scholarly journals ● Downloadable record summarising your scholarly impact as an author, editor and peer reviewer. 3 Unified Authentication A seamless user-experience. Sign in to Publons, EndNote, and Web of Science (entitlements pending) using the same email and password. 4 Modern profile Summary of key publication and peer review metrics Simple and intuitive user interface and clear information hierarchy making it easy for you to build, maintain, and navigate profiles. Navigate to detailed metrics, publication, or peer review and journal editing summaries Research fields, bio, institutional affiliations, and highly cited and peer review awards Most cited publications and citation counts Journals reviewed for and count of verified reviews performed 5 Easy to add publications to your profile 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Show More of Your Research Impact
    Show more of your research impact The world’s researchers use Publons to track their publications, citations, peer reviews, and journal affiliations in one place. The only researcher profile with: All your publications, easily imported Verified peer review and journal from Web of Science, ORCID, or your editing history, powered by partnerships bibliographic reference manager with thousands of scholarly journals (e.g. EndNote or Mendeley) Downloadable record summarizing Trusted citation metrics, your scholarly impact as an author, automatically imported from the editor and peer reviewer Web of Science Core Collection "Publons is brilliant. I like how it is becoming a one- stop portal for all metrics that matter to scientists' careers: H-index, citations, reviews, etc. I love the WS190020 / 01 WS190020 automated graphs of citations and reviews over time." Matty Demont, Senior Economist, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) A more complete picture Managing your research of your impact identity made easy Raise your visibility with the only profile Import your publications from Web of that lets you track your publications, Science, ORCID, or your bibliographic citation metrics, peer review history, reference manager in a few clicks. and journal affiliations, in one place. • Automatically add verified records of your peer review work thanks to integrations with thousands of the world's scholarly journals. • Link with ORCiD to keep your ORCiD Take control of your visibility ID in sync with your Publons profile. in the Web of Science Claiming your publications on Publons ensures they are correctly attributed to you in the Web of Science — the research discovery platform and citation index trusted by funders and Showcase your awards researchers around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Publishing News in 2016 – an Overview
    Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview Dear Reader, The landscape in the publishing industry is constantly changing and evolving. It can get quite challenging to stay updated on the latest happenings, products, and innovations around the world. We have tried to compile some of these in this free downloadable e-book and hope that you find them informative. We have also added some popular links at the end as additional resources that you can refer to. These pieces will also lead you to the original sources, which will definitely provide you detailed information. Happy Reading! Regards, Enago Academy Team Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview 1 Contents Recognizing Peer Review through Publons ................................................................................ 4 Using Publons .......................................................................................................................... 4 Growing Partnerships .............................................................................................................. 4 Sentinels of Science ................................................................................................................. 4 Yewno for Education: A New Approach to Knowledge Discovery ........................................... 5 Using Yewno ............................................................................................................................ 5 Yewno for Education ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece
    publications Case Report Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece Eirini Delikoura 1,‡ and Dimitrios Kouis 2,*,†,‡ 1 MLIS, General Hospital of Athens “Hippokration”, 11527 Athens, Greece; [email protected] 2 Department of Archival, Library & Information Studies, University of West Attica, 12243 Athens, Greece * Correspondence: [email protected] † Current address: Agiou Spyridonos Str., Aegaleo, 12243 Athens, Greece. ‡ These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Recently significant initiatives have been launched for the dissemination of Open Access as part of the Open Science movement. Nevertheless, two other major pillars of Open Science such as Open Research Data (ORD) and Open Peer Review (OPR) are still in an early stage of development among the communities of researchers and stakeholders. The present study sought to unveil the perceptions of a medical and health sciences community about these issues. Through the investigation of researchers‘ attitudes, valuable conclusions can be drawn, especially in the field of medicine and health sciences, where an explosive growth of scientific publishing exists. A quantitative survey was conducted based on a structured questionnaire, with 179 valid responses. The participants in the survey agreed with the Open Peer Review principles. However, they ignored basic terms like FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) and appeared incentivized to permit the exploitation of their data. Regarding Open Peer Review (OPR), participants expressed their agreement, implying their support for a trustworthy evaluation system. Conclusively, researchers Citation: Delikoura, E.; Kouis, D. need to receive proper training for both Open Research Data principles and Open Peer Review Open Research Data and Open Peer processes which combined with a reformed evaluation system will enable them to take full advantage Review: Perceptions of a Medical and of the opportunities that arise from the new scholarly publishing and communication landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Instruction for Work in Publons
    Instruction for Work in Publons Publons is the service allowing researchers to monitor, test and demonstrate their editorial and expert activities in the capacity of editors and reviewers of scientific journals. The profile of Publons is integrated with ResearcherID (RID). It is closely integrated with ORCID and it can be of interest not only for editors and reviewers, but also authors as it contains different analytical tools as well as free reviewer courses. That is how the profile of a scientist looks like in Publons. The page of the profile contains data reflecting the scientist status in Publons. Publons, EndNote and Web of Science (WoS) use a unified system of authorization. Therefore, it is better to use the already existing account which is now single for all resources of the Company Clarivate Analytics. Most likely, you already have the Publons profile, if you have started and worked with RID profile. Simply go to the search page of Publons and enter your name or RID. If you located yourself, simply type your account data from RID on the login page. In case of necessity, you can use the service of password restoration. If you have accounts of EndNote and WoS, you can try to login using them. It is not hard to register the new account. When you login in Publons for the first time, this resource will ask you to fill some information and search your publications in WoS. All this can be done immediately or later. The scientist profile in Publons allows one to enter various kinds of information.
    [Show full text]
  • Web of Science (Wos) and Scopus: the Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today's Academic World
    publications Review Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World Raminta Pranckute˙ Scientific Information Department, Library, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio˙ Ave. 14, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania; [email protected] Abstract: Nowadays, the importance of bibliographic databases (DBs) has increased enormously, as they are the main providers of publication metadata and bibliometric indicators universally used both for research assessment practices and for performing daily tasks. Because the reliability of these tasks firstly depends on the data source, all users of the DBs should be able to choose the most suitable one. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus are the two main bibliographic DBs. The comprehensive evaluation of the DBs’ coverage is practically impossible without extensive bibliometric analyses or literature reviews, but most DBs users do not have bibliometric competence and/or are not willing to invest additional time for such evaluations. Apart from that, the convenience of the DB’s interface, performance, provided impact indicators and additional tools may also influence the users’ choice. The main goal of this work is to provide all of the potential users with an all-inclusive description of the two main bibliographic DBs by gathering the findings that are presented in the most recent literature and information provided by the owners of the DBs at one place. This overview should aid all stakeholders employing publication and citation data in selecting the most suitable DB. Keywords: WoS; Scopus; bibliographic databases; comparison; content coverage; evaluation; citation impact indicators Citation: Pranckute,˙ R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Predatory Publishing – Firm Action Is Required List of Fake Conference in Order to Help Researchers Avoid Falling Into the Trap of Predatory Conferences
    Science of the Total Environment 734 (2020) 139329 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv Predatory publishing – Firm action is required list of fake conference in order to help researchers avoid falling into the trap of predatory conferences. Another issue is the fact that the OMICS Publishing Group claims that Keywords: some of its journals are indexed by databases such as Scopus. Again, a Publons simple check using the Scopus Preview Website (www.scopus.com/ Predatory publishers sources?zone=&origin=NO%20ORIGIN%20DEFINED), which is avail- Scopus fi Open access able free of charge on the internet, con rmed that only 15 journals have been at some point listed in this global abstract and citation data- base (Table 1). In fact, no journals from this publisher have been indexed by Scopus since 2015. The internet has revolutionized all kinds of industries, but it has also A recent study has shown the adverse effect of misleading informa- created opportunities for unscrupulous organizations to take advantage tion. In a seminal piece of work, Moher et al. (2017) determined that of them. Predatory publishing companies have done so through an 1907 articles published by more than 200 supposedly predatory open-access model, sowing confusion through misleading information, journals contained data on roughly 2 million individuals and over lack of transparency, indiscriminate solicitation and deviation from best 8000 animals. Since the quality of the peer-review process of predatory editorial and publication practices (Grudniewicz et al., 2019; Sonne journals is questionable, the validity of this huge amount of data be- et al., 2020a).
    [Show full text]
  • Track Your Research Impact
    Track your research impact Publons Researcher Profiles Bob Green Solution Specialist October 2019 Publons in October 2019 snapshot 2M+ 5.1M+ 4,700+ 250+ Researcher Profiles Verified Reviews Intergrated journals Publisher partners 2 Track more of your research impact and own your online researcher identity Track your publications, citation metrics, peer reviews, and journal editing work in one, easy-to- maintain profile. ● All your publications, instantly imported from Web of Science, ORCiD, or your bibliographic reference manager (e.g. EndNote Zotero, or Mendeley) ● Trusted citation metrics, automatically imported from the Web of Science Core Collection ● Manage your publication records in Web of Science ● Your verified peer review and journal editing history, powered by partnerships with thousands of scholarly journals ● Downloadable record summarising your scholarly impact as an author, editor and peer reviewer. 3 Unified Authentication A seamless user-experience. Sign in to Publons, EndNote, and Web of Science (entitlements pending) using the same email and password. 4 Modern profile Summary of key publication and Simple and intuitive user peer review metrics interface and clear information hierarchy Navigate to detailed metrics, making it easy for you to publication, or peer review and build, maintain, and journal editing summaries navigate profiles. Research fields, bio, institutional affiliations, and highly cited and peer review awards Most cited publications and citation counts Journals reviewed for and count of verified reviews performed 5 Easy to add publications to your profile • Import publications directly from Web of Science via your Private Dashboard. • Import publications from ORCiD, DOI/title search, or by file upload. • Validate which publications are yours and add them to your profile.
    [Show full text]
  • Publons Seeks to Attract Reviewers and Improve Peer Review Lilian Nassi-Calòa,*
    EDITORIAL http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;4;00018 IN TIME: PUBLONS BUSCA ATRAIR PARECERISTAS E APERFEIÇOAR A AVALIAÇÃO POR PARES In time: Publons seeks to attract reviewers and improve peer review Lilian Nassi-Calòa,* avaliação por pares, um dos pilares da comunicação científica, vem passando por um momento de transição, em direção à maior confiabilidade, transparência e responsabilidade.1 É fato conhecido da comunidade acadêmica a saturação pela qual passa o atual modelo de revisão por pares. O aumento contínuoA do número de publicações não é acompanhado pelo incremento da quantidade de pesquisadores que atuam como pareceris- tas dos artigos submetidos. Em consequência disso, a qualidade dos pareceres diminuiu e o tempo necessário para obtê-los, por outro lado, aumentou consideravelmente, o que ocasiona atrasos indesejáveis na disseminação do conhecimento e no avanço da ciência. Sociedades científicas, instituições de pesquisa, agências de fomento e pesquisadores vêm se dedicando a estudar o tema; confe- rências e workshops são organizados em todo o mundo a fim de debater novas propostas e o futuro da avaliação por pares,2-4 inclu- sive a possibilidade de prescindir dela, ao menos em parte.5 Surgiram novas formas de avaliação além dos clássicos modelos simples e duplo-cego, como a avaliação em cascata e a avaliação pós-publicação. Essa modalidade em particular vem sendo adotada por um número crescente de periódicos, além dos repositórios de preprints.6 A avaliação por pares é um trabalho extremamente especializado, que demanda tempo e conhecimento, e pelo qual o parece- rista — ao menos até recentemente — não recebe créditos proporcionais ao seu empenho.
    [Show full text]
  • Grant Review in Focus — 2
    GRANT REVIEW IN FOCUS Publons is part of GLOBAL STATE OF PEER REVIEW SERIES Grant Review in Focus — 2 Foreword 3 Executive summary 4 What do we already know? 5 1 The role of grant funding in the research lifecycle 11 2 Deep dive: The grant review process 17 3 New horizons in grant peer review 30 4 Appendix 37 Grant Review in Focus — 3 FOREWORD Last year Publons released its inaugural Global Grant Review In Focus brings together the State of Peer Review report, the largest ever most extensive researcher survey on grant study of peer review. Conceived in response to peer review ever conducted – with over 4,500 the gap in empirical assessments of global peer researchers surveyed – and the full power review, we were delighted with the audience the of Web of Science and InCites datasets. The report received and the debate it generated. researchers we surveyed enumerated interactions with more than 800 unique funders across As a result, we are proud to announce the 95 countries. We subsequently interviewed second report in the Global State of Peer a range of these funders to build a detailed Review Series: Grant Review in Focus. As an understanding of their perspectives. independent platform of 1.9-million researchers and 5-million peer reviews, Publons is uniquely While we will cover the details of our findings capable of calling upon diverse data and in the report that follows, I would like to call out insights on peer review worldwide. In openly a theme that has appeared in both this and the sharing these insights with the research Global State of Peer Review report: a need to community we hope to inspire evidence- ‘close the loop’ between the work of reviewers based debate and inform decision making.
    [Show full text]