Despite the growth in the number of bibliometric analyses published in the peer-reviewed literature, few articles provide guidance on methods and reporting to ensure reliability, robustness, and reproducibility. Consequently, the quality of reporting in existing bibliometric studies varies greatly. In response, we are developing a preliminary Guidance List for the repOrting of Bibliometric AnaLyses (GLOBAL), a reporting guideline for bibliometric analyses. This paper outlines a scoping review that aims to identify and categorize bibliometric recommendations from the literature to develop an initial list of candidate items for GLOBAL. Five bibliographic databases, three preprint servers, and gray literature were systematically searched. Twenty-three out of 48,750 records fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Six documents contained bibliometric reporting recommendations based on a complete or partial literature review; all other sources (n = 17) contained opinion-based recommendations. A 32-item recommendation list that will inform the development of GLOBAL was created. A paucity of evidence-based studies on bibliometric reporting exists in the literature, supporting the need to create a reporting guideline for bibliometric analyses. The next step in GLOBAL project will focus on conducting a two-round Delphi study to achieve consensus on which of the 32 items should be included in GLOBAL.

Despite the growth in the number of bibliometric analyses published in the peer-reviewed literature, few articles provide guidance on methods and reporting to ensure reliability, robustness, and reproducibility. Consequently, the quality of reporting in existing bibliometric studies varies greatly. In response, we are developing a preliminary Guidance List for the repOrting of Bibliometric AnaLyses (GLOBAL) , a reporting guideline for bibliometric analyses. This paper outlines a scoping review that aims to identify and categorise bibliometric recommendations from the literature to develop an initial list of candidate items for the GLOBAL. Five bibliographic databases, three preprint servers, and grey literature were systematically searched. Twenty-three out of 48,750 records fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Six documents contained bibliometric reporting recommendations based on a complete or partial literature review; all other sources (n = 17) contained opinion-based recommendations. A 32-item recommendation list that will inform the development of the GLOBAL was created. A paucity of evidence-based studies on bibliometric reporting exists in the literature, supporting the need to create a reporting guideline for bibliometric analyses. The next step in the GLOBAL project will focus on conducting a two-round Delphi study to achieve consensus on which of the 32 items should be included in GLOBAL.

Transparency within biomedical research is essential for research integrity, credibility, and reproducibility. To increase adherence to optimal scientific practices and enhance transparency, we propose the creation of a journal transparency tool (JTT) that will allow users to obtain information about a given scholarly journal’s operations and transparency policies. This study is part of a program of research to obtain user preferences to inform the proposed JTT. Here, we report on our consultation with clinicians and researchers. This mixed-methods study was conducted in two parts. The first part involved a cross-sectional survey conducted on a random sample of authors from biomedical journals. The survey asked clinicians and researchers about the inclusion of a series of potential scholarly metrics and user features in the proposed JTT. Quantitative survey items were summarized with descriptive statistics. Thematic content analysis was employed to analyze text-based responses. Subsequent focus groups used survey responses to further explore the inclusion of items in the JTT. Items with less than 70% agreement were used to structure discussion points during these sessions. Participants voted on the use of user features and metrics to be considered within the journal tool after each discussion. Thematic content analysis was conducted on interview transcripts to identify the core themes discussed. A total of 632 participants (5.5% response rate) took part in the survey. A collective total of 74.7% of respondents found it either ‘occasionally, ‘often’, or ‘almost always’ difficult to determine if health information online is based on reliable research evidence. Twenty-two participants took part in the focus groups. Three user features and five journal tool metrics were major discussion points during these sessions. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts resulted in six themes. The use of registration was the only item to not meet the 70% threshold after both the survey and focus groups. Participants demonstrated low scholarly communication literacy when discussing tool metric suggestions. Our findings suggest that the JTT would be valuable for both researchers and clinicians. The outcomes of this research will contribute to developing and refining the tool in accordance with researchers and clinicians.

Work disparities, such as unfairness in pay or unequal distribution of work experienced by nurses in long-term care (LTC), can impact the retention and health of this workforce. Background: Despite the significant impact of disparities on nurses’ health in LTC, a literature review on work disparities of nurses in LTC has not been conducted. Method: This scoping review aimed to explore the nature and extent of research on meso-level work disparities experienced by nurses in LTC and its links with nurse health and well-being. Five databases were searched: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), SCOPUS, and CINAHL (EBSCO host). Results: Of the 5652 articles retrieved, 16 studies (14 quantitative and 2 qualitative) published between 1997 and 2024 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 53 work disparities were identified. Only four articles investigated the association of a work disparity with a variable of health (e.g., physical, mental, or poor general health). Conclusions: The results suggest that more attention to how disparities impact nurses’ health and lived experiences is warranted. Meso-level disparities from this review provide an initial basis to consider possibilities in the workplace, especially in supporting equity and opportunities for health and well-being at work (e.g., through fair access to professional growth opportunities and a more equitable balance of work expectations and demands of nursing staff). Future studies of the intersection of macro- and meso-level factors are needed to inform better workplace practices and social and economic policies to support the well-being, health, and safety of nurses at work in LTC.

Background We propose the creation of a journal transparency tool (JTT), which will allow users to obtain information about a given scholarly journal’s operations and policies. We are obtaining preferences from different stakeholders to inform the development of this tool. This study aimed to identify the publishing community’s preferences for the JTT. Methods We conducted a modified three-round Delphi survey. Representatives from publishing houses and journal publishers were recruited through purposeful and snowball sampling. The first two Delphi rounds involved an online survey with items about JTT metrics and user features. During the third round, participants discussed and voted on JTT metric items that did not reach consensus after round 2 within a virtual consensus meeting. We defined consensus as 80% agreement to include or exclude an item in the JTT. Results Eighty-six participants completed the round 1 survey, and 43 participants (50% of round 1) completed the round 2 survey. In both rounds, respondents voted on JTT user feature and JTT metric item preferences and answered open-ended survey questions regarding the JTT. In round 3, a total of 21 participants discussed and voted on JTT metric items that did not reach consensus after round 2 during an online consensus group meeting. Fifteen out of 30 JTT metric items and none of the four JTT user feature items reached the 80% consensus threshold after all rounds of voting. Analysis of the round 3 online consensus group transcript resulted in two themes: ‘factors impacting support for JTT metrics’ and ‘suggestions for user clarity.’ Conclusions Participants suggested that the publishing community’s primary concerns for a JTT are to ensure that the tool is relevant, user-friendly, accessible, and equitable. The outcomes of this research will contribute to developing and refining the tool in accordance with publishing preferences.

Background: Increasing the recruitment and retention of nurses within long-term care (LTC) is a growing challenge faced by the healthcare community. Addressing this problem will require a greater understanding of the day-to-day experiences of nurses, including the disparities and unequal treatment experienced by this group of workers (e.g., pay parity, discrimination, and unfair job demands). However, while there is a need to better understand work disparities faced by nurses, a formalized definition and framework for examining work disparities do not exist within the literature. Objective: To create a conceptual framework to define and analyze work disparities experienced by nurses in LTC. Methods: This analysis was conducted in adherence to Podsakoff et al.'s four-stage series of recommendations. A partial survey of the literature and operationalizations of work disparities were analyzed to create a core list of attributes of work disparities among nurses in LTC. A definition and framework for classifying work disparities were then posited through a dialogic process and refined by testing on two studies. Results: A definition of work disparities was posited and four categories of work disparities were identified: job security, work compensation, work opportunities, and workplace treatment. A matrix for classifying the variables of work disparities and comparator groups was refined. Conclusion: With the increasing recognition of unequal treatment of nurses in LTC, this framework can enable further research within this area to support and enhance opportunities for the retention and health of the LTC workforce.