Talk:WikiJournal of Medicine/Open tasks and discussions

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Evolution and evolvability in topic SCOPUS reapplication

This page contains discussions of matters that are probably still in need of either either an action or further discussion. Please archive relatively finished discussions (to Talk:WikiJournal of Medicine/2014-2019).

WikiJMed SCOPUS application
AppliedMarch 2017
RejectedApril 2017
Re-appliedMarch 2019
AcceptedJune 2020
Application tracker

SCOPUS reapplication Edit

In March 2017, WikiJMed applied to SCOPUS. Although they noted that it is an interesting concept, it was rejected as not be yet fully worked through:

  • Not clear whether it would attract original articles or whether it is just a variant of Wikipedia on medical and health topics
  • The associate editors were self-nominated
  • The "publishing ethics" statement was merely a link to the COPE website

The 24-month waiting period before reapplication is now complete. I suggest we draft the reapplication below, in particular, the cover letter they request responding to the 2017 concerns.

Specific requirements Edit

Per application form:

  1. Cover letter addressing March 2017 concerns (PDF upload)
  2. Most recent articles (x10 PDF upload) or most recent issues (x3 PDF upload)
  3. Table of contents for a complete issue (x1 PDF upload)
  4. Aims & scope
    WikiJMed is an open access journal in medicine and biomedicine published free of charge.
    The journal aims to ensure accurate medical and biomedical information is published in a way that maximises its public good. The journal has a particularly strong outreach and public impact focus via it's 'Wikipedia-integration' features: Articles that pass peer-review are published as a citable, indexed PDF, and suitable text and images are integrated into Wikipedia and related projects (with a link to the indexed PDF). The vast readership of Wikipedia results in a high effective impact of included works. It therefore enables academic and medical professionals to contribute expert knowledge to the Wikimedia movement in the academic publishing format that directly rewards them with citable publications. Peer reviews are published alongside articles for transparency and auditability.
    The journal's scope is medicine and biomedicine, broadly construed. The journal publishes both review articles and original research in various formats. The journal targets a broad population spanning from advanced researchers and clinicians to students and laypersons, wherein the latter can get quick explanations of advanced terms by in-line links to Wikipedia.
  5. Start year of current title
    • 2016
  6. Has this title undergone any name changes, mergers or splits (prev. names and dates)
    • Yes, 2014-2016 Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, 2016-present WikiJournal of Medicine
  7. Contact emails
  8. Link to the publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
  9. Frequency
    • Continuous
  10. Average number of research articles and review articles published per year
    • 5.6 (2014-2019)
  11. Are all articles published in English
    • Yes
  12. Do all articles have English-language abstracts and article
    • Yes
  13. Do the articles have references in Roman alphabet
    • Yes
  14. Which type of peer review applies to this title (editor review / Open peer review / Single-blind peer review / Double-blind peer review)
    • Open Peer review
  15. Please provide a detailed description of the peer review process
    At submission, authors may optionally recommend up to 6 reviewers
    A handling editor is assigned from amongst the editorial board or associate editors.
    The handling editor typically endeavours to include at least one reviewer who was not on the recommended list in addition to contacting those listed. For highly multidisciplinary articles, handling editors will endeavour to secure reviewers from multiple fields.
    All peer review comments are open. 75% of peer reviewers additional agree to reveal their name.
    Peer reviewers are given guidance on the peer review criteria.
    In particular, any article intended to cave contents integrated into Wikipedia must also comply with Wikipedia's strict readability and sourcing standards:
    After peer reviewers have all agreed that the author has addressed their concerns, the editorial board decides whether to publish the article.
    If there is an intractable disagreement between the author and a peer reviewer, the other reviewer(s) will be asked to give opinion and, if necessary, an additional reviewer will be sought.
    For further details see:
  16. What is the geographic distribution of editors of the title
    • International - different continents (different continent / same continent / same country / same institution)
  17. Please list some examples of countries of editors (if any countries predominate, please indicate)
    • Sweden, Ireland, USA x3, Australia, Belgium, India, UK, Palestine/Egypt
  18. Provide information about the main handling editor(s) of the title (x3) : Name, affiliation, country, online professional information
  19. What is the geographic distribution of authors publishing in this title (different continent / same continent / same country / same institution)
    • International - different continents
  20. Please list some examples of countries of authors (if any countries predominate, please indicate)
    • Finland, Canada x2, UK x5, India x2, Nigeria, Australia x10, Belgium x2, Ireland, Sweden x3, USA x6, Saudi Arabia , South Africa, Germany
  21. Is the title (co-)published on behalf of a scientific society
    • No
  22. Does the serial title have DOIs which are registered with CrossRef
    • Yes
  23. Is the title already indexed in other bibliographic databases
    • Yes
  24. Does this title offer open access to its full-text content (yes / no / yes+DOAJ)
    • Yes, registered with DOAJ
  25. Other comments / remarks
    • In addition to the changes made in response to the specific comments given in March 2017, as per the cover letter, we believe that we have further developed the journal structure in all aspects. Our policies and process guidelines for editors have been refined and updated, in addition to our bylaws. We have expanded geographical diversity in our editorial board. The editorial board aims to cover a range of expertise across medicine as well as open-access and Wikimedia projects. The journal aims for impact in scholarly citations, such as measured by Altmetrics, and wide general public readership by integrating content into Wikipedia. Given the very wide reach of the articles (readership >6.9 million per year through Wikipedia) we are particularly cautious in our quality control. All plagiarism checks, peer reviews and editorial recommendations are made public alongside published articles.

SCOPUS Content policy and selection criteria Edit

Journal Policy
  1. Convincing editorial policy
  2. Type of peer review
  3. Diversity in geographical distribution of editors
  4. Diversity in geographical distribution of authors
  1. Academic contribution to the field
  2. Clarity of abstracts
  3. Quality of and conformity to the stated aims and scope of the journal
  4. Readability of articles
Journal Standing
  1. Citedness of journal articles in Scopus
  2. Editor standing
Publishing Regularity
  1. No delays or interruptions in the publication schedule
    • Although vague, this is an area where WikiJournal processes can be improved. In general delays vary depending on the response rates of peer reviewers
Online Availability
  1. Full journal content available online
  2. English language journal home page available
  3. Quality of journal home page

Discussion Edit

I'm pretty optimistic for the SCOPUS resubmission. The main detraction is probably the publication rate, however a number of articles are currently close to the end of the pipeline. Note that WikiJSci may be similarly eligible, but it is probably best to apply one at a time given the 24-month re-application wait time. WikiJMed is also eligible for PMC (criteria) and possibly SciELO, so we may start drafting that application soon as well. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:23, 9 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I support resubmission, as well as additional indexing, particularly PMC when we are eligible. However, I will not have the time myself to work on this, at least until the grant application and some tax work is done. Mikael Häggström (discusscontribs) 15:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks to the editors, WJM seems to meet all the basic criteria of Scopus. But do not overlook this tiny clause: Have the three most recent journal issues or 9 articles plus a table of contents ready for uploading.... There are only 8 articles so far. So submission may be done after acceptance of new article. Chhandama (discusscontribs) 09:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Submission Edit

I have now submitted the above items using the application form (tracking number = B5576DA669EC06F0). T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 10:25, 27 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Acceptance Edit

The WikiJMed application for inclusion in Scopus has been assessed by their Content Selection & Advisory Board (CSAB). The decision was to accept, noting the following as informing their decision:

  • Current publication rate and citation rate would normally be too low for SCOPUS inclusion
  • Noted constructive response to 2017 criticisms
  • Noted interactions with Wikimedia ecosystem as key part of "knowledge delivery universe"
  • Described as "embryonic journal with global potential"
  • To be benchmarked against general medicine SCIMAGO category to monitor progress

T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 01:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Return to "WikiJournal of Medicine/Open tasks and discussions" page.