ArticleCureus2024
Difficult Terrains of Research Publications Faced by Researchers: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The publication of scholarly work in peer-reviewed journals is a well-established method for disseminating knowledge and findings to a global audience. However, the publishing process is constantly evolving and encountering various obstacles that hinder progress. Despite a significant increase in the number of research projects undertaken, there are few studies evaluating the challenges faced by investigators in publishing their research. This study aims to identify the factors and elements that influence the publication process after the completion of research. Methods This study included 759 projects approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) from 2016 to 2021 at a tertiary care centre in South India. A list of these approved projects was analysed for overall output in terms of publication and completion. Investigators were contacted and interviewed using a validated, 15-question survey to identify various factors influencing scientific publications. Results A total of 759 projects approved by the IEC from 2016 to 2021 were analyzed. It was found that only 36.72% of studies were completed by faculty members, and the publication conversion rate was 34.24%. A single-point analysis showed a statistically significant lower conversion rate for resident articles (p = 0.032). The 15-point analysis detailed the factors influencing publication conversion, revealing that the majority of researchers publish based on academic and research interests (68.89% and 72.12%, respectively). Various deterrents to publication, such as study design, statistical analysis, journal selection, and knowledge about journal submission, were identified. Notably, 98.4% of researchers expressed a desire to publish more in the future, highlighting the importance of this study. Conclusion The study highlights areas that require attention to facilitate and augment research. It identifies the real gaps in the publication process and suggests points of intervention needed to enhance the research environment, increase publication rates, and establish demand-based research support units in the medical education sector.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.