While Medjaden has been helping medical researchers publish their results for over a decade,  Medjaden also has published three original research articles in peer-reviewed journals, sharing its experience and perspective as well as a summary of biomedical publishing in China. 

1) “Science citation indexed papers and research performance assessment: an overview of editing companies,” published in Medicine and Philosophy in October 2014 [Medicine and Philosophy, 2014, 035(019):4-7]

Abstract: Science citation index (SCI), an objective evaluation tool for journals, has become an important indicator in assessing scientific research performance in China. It has strongly impacted the direction and scope of researchers and generated a large number of “SCI” papers. This review compares the systems assessing scientific research performance between Chinese universities and institutions and those in western countries. It is concluded that SCI papers have played and will continue to play an important role in the assessment system worldwide. However, assessment solely based on SCI papers compromises scientific research development. In addition, SCI papers mania has resulted in the prosperity and chaos of various paper service companies.

2) “Perceptions of Chinese biomedical researchers towards academic misconduct: a comparison between 2015 and 2010,” published in Science and Engineering Ethics of Springer press in April 2017 [Science and Engineering Ethics, 2018, 24:629–645];

        Abstract: Publications by Chinese researchers in scientific journals have dramatically increased over the past decade; however, academic misconduct also becomes more prevalent in the country. The aim of this prospective study was to understand the perceptions of Chinese biomedical researchers towards academic misconduct and the trend from 2010 to 2015. A questionnaire comprising 10 questions was designed and then validated by ten biomedical researchers in China. In the years 2010 and 2015, respectively, the questionnaire was sent as a survey to biomedical researchers at teaching hospitals, universities, and medical institutes in mainland China. Data were analyzed by the Chi squared test, one-way analysis of variance with the Tukey post hoc test, or Spearman’s rank correlation method, where appropriate. The overall response rates in 2010 and 2015 were 4.5% (446/9986) and 5.5% (832/15,127), respectively. Data from 15 participants in 2010 were invalid, and analysis was thus performed for 1263 participants. Among the participants, 54.7% thought that academic misconduct was serious-to-extremely serious, and 71.2% believed that the Chinese authorities paid no or little attention to the aca- demic misconduct. Moreover, 70.2 and 65.2% of participants considered that the punishment for academic misconduct at the authority and institution levels, respectively, was not appropriate or severe enough. Inappropriate authorship and plagiarism were the most common forms of academic misconduct. The most important factor underlying academic misconduct was the academic assessment system, as judged by 50.7% of the participants. Participants estimated that 40.1% (39.8 ± 23.5% in 2010; 40.2 ± 24.5% in 2015) of published scientific articles were associated with some form of academic misconduct. Their perceptions towards academic misconduct had not significantly changed over the 5 years. Reform of the academic assessment system should be the fundamental approach to tackling this problem in China.

3) “Increase in articles published by authors from Mainland Chinese hospitals in high-impact journals: a comparison between 2012 and 2017,” published in Current Science of the Indian Academy of Sciences in October 2019 [Current Science, 2019, 117(10):1793-1799].

Abstract: The research outputs have rarely been studied in Mainland China. The present study aimed to analyze research articles published in high-impact journals (HIJs) by authors from Mainland Chinese hospitals in 2012 and 2017. All types of articles were searched in the PubMed and Embase data-bases. The durations were 1 January–31 December 2012 and 1 January–31 December 2017. Ten parameters were analysed. Overall, 205 and 871 articles were published in 2012 and 2017, respectively, in 198 HIJs. The proportion of articles published in journals with journal impact factor (JIF) > 25 was higher in 2017 than in 2012 (12.3% vs 9.8%). The number (proportion) of original articles increased from 146 (71.2%) in 2012 to 509 (58.4%) in 2017. There were 92 (44.9%) and 89 (43.4%) articles in basic and clinical research in 2012, whereas the numbers (proportions) were 409 (44.9%) and 230 (26.4%), respectively, in 2017. The number of articles acknowledging domestic (within China) and international (between Mainland China and other countries) cooperation in 2017 increased by almost seven-fold (281 vs 41) and eight-fold (289 vs 38), respectively. Funding acknowledgement was made in 85.4% and 75.8% of articles in 2012 and 2017 respectively. The number of articles published in HIJs by authors from Mainland Chinese hospitals has increased rapidly from 2012 to 2017, with only approximately 10% being published in journals with JIF > 25. The number of original articles on basic and clinical research has dramatically increased. Domestic and international cooperation and research funding are found to play an important role.