IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v124y2020i2d10.1007_s11192-020-03493-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of publication delays in the orthopedic surgery manuscript review process from 2010 to 2015

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel A. Charen

    (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

  • Nolan A. Maher

    (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

  • Nicole Zubizarreta

    (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

  • Jashvant Poeran

    (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

  • Calin S. Moucha

    (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

  • Shai Shemesh

    (Rabin Medical Center
    Tel Aviv University)

Abstract

A continued growth in the volume of scientific literature may strain the practice of peer review possibly leading to delays in publication. While this appears true anecdotally, exact statistics are lacking. The study goal was to quantify delays in publication in the field of orthopaedic surgery. Eight orthopedic surgery journals with available publication dates between January 2010 and December 2015 were included. Main outcomes were (1) acceptance delay (time from submission to acceptance) and (2) publication delay (time from acceptance to publication). Temporal trends for both outcomes were assessed graphically while simple linear regression was applied to assess statistical significance. 12,811 manuscripts were included that released both acceptance and publication delays. From 2010 to 2015, the median overall acceptance delay decreased from 168 (interquartile range [IQR] 115–225) to 113 (IQR 62–176) days. Similarly, there was a decrease in publication delay from 55 (IQR 26–83) days in 2010 to 16 (IQR 9–54) days in 2015; both trends p

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel A. Charen & Nolan A. Maher & Nicole Zubizarreta & Jashvant Poeran & Calin S. Moucha & Shai Shemesh, 2020. "Evaluation of publication delays in the orthopedic surgery manuscript review process from 2010 to 2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1127-1135, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:124:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03493-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03493-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03493-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03493-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz, 2015. "Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2215-2222, November.
    2. J. Rigby & D. Cox & K. Julian, 2018. "Journal peer review: a bar or bridge? An analysis of a paper’s revision history and turnaround time, and the effect on citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1087-1105, March.
    3. Peng Dong & Marie Loh & Adrian Mondry, 2006. "Publication lag in biomedical journals varies due to the periodical's publishing model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(2), pages 271-286, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Björk, Bo-Christer & Solomon, David, 2013. "The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 914-923.
    2. Ramona Weinrich, 2019. "Opportunities for the Adoption of Health-Based Sustainable Dietary Patterns: A Review on Consumer Research of Meat Substitutes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.
    4. Dunaiski, Marcel & Geldenhuys, Jaco & Visser, Willem, 2019. "On the interplay between normalisation, bias, and performance of paper impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 270-290.
    5. Augusteijn, Hilde Elisabeth Maria & van Aert, Robbie Cornelis Maria & van Assen, Marcel A. L. M., 2021. "Posterior Probabilities of Effect Sizes and Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: An Intuitive Approach of Dealing with Publication Bias," OSF Preprints avkgj, Center for Open Science.
    6. Ruhua Huang & Yuting Huang & Fan Qi & Leyi Shi & Baiyang Li & Wei Yu, 2022. "Exploring the characteristics of special issues: distribution, topicality, and citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5233-5256, September.
    7. Neal R. Haddaway & Max W. Callaghan & Alexandra M. Collins & William F. Lamb & Jan C. Minx & James Thomas & Denny John, 2020. "On the use of computer‐assistance to facilitate systematic mapping," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), December.
    8. Vincent Raoult, 2020. "How Many Papers Should Scientists Be Reviewing? An Analysis Using Verified Peer Review Reports," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, January.
    9. Eloy López-Meneses & Esteban Vázquez-Cano & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2020. "Socioeconomic Effects in Cyberbullying: Global Research Trends in the Educational Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-31, June.
    10. Jinseok Kim & Jinmo Kim & Jason Owen-Smith, 2019. "Generating automatically labeled data for author name disambiguation: an iterative clustering method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 253-280, January.
    11. Soo Jeung Lee & Christian Schneijderberg & Yangson Kim & Isabel Steinhardt, 2021. "Have Academics’ Citation Patterns Changed in Response to the Rise of World University Rankings? A Test Using First-Citation Speeds," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    12. Lutz Bornmann & Robin Haunschild & Rüdiger Mutz, 2021. "Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Yu Zhang & Min Wang & Morteza Saberi & Elizabeth Chang, 2022. "Analysing academic paper ranking algorithms using test data and benchmarks: an investigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 4045-4074, July.
    14. Edré Moreira & Wagner Meira & Marcos André Gonçalves & Alberto H. F. Laender, 2023. "The rise of hyperprolific authors in computer science: characterization and implications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2945-2974, May.
    15. Balázs Győrffy & Andrea Magda Nagy & Péter Herman & Ádám Török, 2018. "Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 409-426, October.
    16. Lanu Kim & Jason H. Portenoy & Jevin D. West & Katherine W. Stovel, 2020. "Scientific journals still matter in the era of academic search engines and preprint archives," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(10), pages 1218-1226, October.
    17. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "Do papers (really) match journals’ “aims and scope”? A computational assessment of innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7449-7470, December.
    18. Jensen, Scott & Liu, Xiaozhong & Yu, Yingying & Milojevic, Staša, 2016. "Generation of topic evolution trees from heterogeneous bibliographic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 606-621.
    19. Bornmann, Lutz & Haunschild, Robin, 2022. "Empirical analysis of recent temporal dynamics of research fields: Annual publications in chemistry and related areas as an example," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    20. Carlo Galli & Stefano Guizzardi, 2021. "The Effect of Article Characteristics on Citation Number in a Diachronic Dataset of the Biomedical Literature on Chronic Inflammation: An Analysis by Ensemble Machines," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-11, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:124:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03493-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.