- Email: [email protected]
Radiography research as a global community
Radiography 21 (2015) 108e109
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Radiography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/radi
Editorial
Radiography research as a global community
The Radiography journal aims to promote excellence in the profession of radiography by publishing clinical, scientific and educational material of the highest quality and subsequently ensuring wide dissemination. The international emphasis of the Radiography journal (in terms of both authorship and readership) is essential to achieving this aim. A study by Snaith compared four radiography journals from 2004 to 2011, and Radiography was noted to have the greatest international emphasis with 38.5% of articles having a non-UK based author.1 Since then the number of published articles with a non-UK first author has gradually risen to 47% in 2014,2 and so far in 2015 we are exceeding this level. This current issue reflects this trend, presenting 23 articles with 52% being led by non-UK authors, representing eleven different countries. In the same study Snaith also identified an overall reduction in sole authorship over the eight-year period studied, with an average of 2.4 authors per article across all four journals.1 The data demonstrated an authorship trend towards larger collaborative groups, with authors tending to write with colleagues from the same institution. However in Radiography we are seeing an increasing trend in both intra-national collaboration and international collaboration; the Special Issue for Dose Optimisation and Image Quality (Issue 4, 2014) was an excellent example of international collaboration in action. Benefits of international co-authorship have been outlined by various authors3e5; significant correlation between prolific authors' productivity and co-authorship has also been identified in the radiography field.6 The co-author may provide the impetus to ‘complete the transition from idea or data to published article’,6,7 and may offer an international perspective and context to the article which could increase the generalisability of the findings. In turn, the international authorship may generate increased article views, downloads and citations by increasing visibility within their geographical areas. The Radiography journal internationalisation strategy includes engagement and collaboration with key radiography professional societies and international representation on the Editorial Board. It is with pleasure that we welcome three new members to our Board, representing Portugal (Luis Lanca), Denmark (Helle Precht) and the UK (Helen McNair), and we are also in the process of recruiting new Associate Editors to join our Editorial Team (see advert in this issue). However as an Editorial team we need to be mindful of the effects of professional social media in creating a rapidly ‘shrinking’ world, where geographical (and professional) boundaries become increasingly blurred. One of the online articles listed in this Issue (Lawson and Cowling)8 discusses a systematic review related to the role of social media in supporting radiographer http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.03.006 1078-8174/© 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The College of Radiographers.
professional development. Social media was found to encourage collaboration and networking, especially between practitioners who were geographically isolated or those who lacked professional confidence. The article concludes that social media has the potential to provide unique benefits to practising radiographers, including immediate global access to higher education, collaboration and networking. This is an interesting conclusion given that as I write this article an international collaboration between key individuals in Canada, Australia and the UK and three peer reviewed radiography journals has resulted in the launch of a radiography journal club via Twitter (#MedRadJclub). This provides participants with an opportunity to read a selected article and then engage in discussion with authors, the editorial teams and other participants from around the world. Journal clubs, whether held locally within a radiology department, or virtually as in this initiative, are to be welcomed by the radiography profession as they promote a culture of research and evidence based practice. In doing so they help to develop critical appraisal skills and foster national and international collaboration. While Twitter may not be the easiest medium in which to have informed debate, it is nevertheless an informal and instantaneous way of breaking down geographical and professional barriers. This form of professional engagement with colleagues may ultimately result in more formalised international radiography research partnerships and collaborations. This editorial commenced with a reminder about the aims of the Radiography journal, which focussed on promoting excellence in the radiography profession through the publication of high quality research. The assessment of quality and impact of research undertaken within UK higher education institutions is via the Research Excellence Framework (REF), which has recently reported findings back to the universities. The following Guest Editorial by REF panel member Professor Richard Price outlines the current REF status and offers some thoughts for the future of radiography research which will also be relevant to our international colleagues.
References 1. Snaith B. Peer-review publication patterns: an international comparison of radiography journals. J Med Imag Radiat Sci 2013;44:37e43. 2. Elsevier. Radiography journal publisher's report. January 2015. 3. Harande YI. Author productivity and collaboration: an investigation of the relationship using the literature of technology. Libri 2001;51:124e7. 4. Yousefi-Nooraie R, Akbari-Kamrani M, Hanneman RA, Etemadi A. Association between co-authorship network and scientific productivity and impact indicators in academic medical research centers: a case study in Iran. Health Res Policy Syst 2008;6(9) [electronic version]. Available from: http://www.health-policysystems.com/content/6/1/9 [accessed 12.03.15].
Editorial / Radiography 21 (2015) 108e109 5. Nightingale JM, Marshall G. Citation analysis as a measure of article quality, journal influence and individual researcher performance. Radiography 2012;18: 60e7. 6. Snaith B. An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004e2011. J Med Radiat Sci 2013;60(3):93e9. 7. Snaith B. Collaboration in radiography: a bibliometric analysis. Radiography 2012;18:270e4. 8. Lawson C, Cowling C. Social media: the next frontier for professional development in radiography. Radiography 2015;21(2):e74e80.
109
J. Nightingale School of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford M6 6PU, UK E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected].
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Radiography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/radi
Editorial
Radiography research as a global community
The Radiography journal aims to promote excellence in the profession of radiography by publishing clinical, scientific and educational material of the highest quality and subsequently ensuring wide dissemination. The international emphasis of the Radiography journal (in terms of both authorship and readership) is essential to achieving this aim. A study by Snaith compared four radiography journals from 2004 to 2011, and Radiography was noted to have the greatest international emphasis with 38.5% of articles having a non-UK based author.1 Since then the number of published articles with a non-UK first author has gradually risen to 47% in 2014,2 and so far in 2015 we are exceeding this level. This current issue reflects this trend, presenting 23 articles with 52% being led by non-UK authors, representing eleven different countries. In the same study Snaith also identified an overall reduction in sole authorship over the eight-year period studied, with an average of 2.4 authors per article across all four journals.1 The data demonstrated an authorship trend towards larger collaborative groups, with authors tending to write with colleagues from the same institution. However in Radiography we are seeing an increasing trend in both intra-national collaboration and international collaboration; the Special Issue for Dose Optimisation and Image Quality (Issue 4, 2014) was an excellent example of international collaboration in action. Benefits of international co-authorship have been outlined by various authors3e5; significant correlation between prolific authors' productivity and co-authorship has also been identified in the radiography field.6 The co-author may provide the impetus to ‘complete the transition from idea or data to published article’,6,7 and may offer an international perspective and context to the article which could increase the generalisability of the findings. In turn, the international authorship may generate increased article views, downloads and citations by increasing visibility within their geographical areas. The Radiography journal internationalisation strategy includes engagement and collaboration with key radiography professional societies and international representation on the Editorial Board. It is with pleasure that we welcome three new members to our Board, representing Portugal (Luis Lanca), Denmark (Helle Precht) and the UK (Helen McNair), and we are also in the process of recruiting new Associate Editors to join our Editorial Team (see advert in this issue). However as an Editorial team we need to be mindful of the effects of professional social media in creating a rapidly ‘shrinking’ world, where geographical (and professional) boundaries become increasingly blurred. One of the online articles listed in this Issue (Lawson and Cowling)8 discusses a systematic review related to the role of social media in supporting radiographer http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.03.006 1078-8174/© 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The College of Radiographers.
professional development. Social media was found to encourage collaboration and networking, especially between practitioners who were geographically isolated or those who lacked professional confidence. The article concludes that social media has the potential to provide unique benefits to practising radiographers, including immediate global access to higher education, collaboration and networking. This is an interesting conclusion given that as I write this article an international collaboration between key individuals in Canada, Australia and the UK and three peer reviewed radiography journals has resulted in the launch of a radiography journal club via Twitter (#MedRadJclub). This provides participants with an opportunity to read a selected article and then engage in discussion with authors, the editorial teams and other participants from around the world. Journal clubs, whether held locally within a radiology department, or virtually as in this initiative, are to be welcomed by the radiography profession as they promote a culture of research and evidence based practice. In doing so they help to develop critical appraisal skills and foster national and international collaboration. While Twitter may not be the easiest medium in which to have informed debate, it is nevertheless an informal and instantaneous way of breaking down geographical and professional barriers. This form of professional engagement with colleagues may ultimately result in more formalised international radiography research partnerships and collaborations. This editorial commenced with a reminder about the aims of the Radiography journal, which focussed on promoting excellence in the radiography profession through the publication of high quality research. The assessment of quality and impact of research undertaken within UK higher education institutions is via the Research Excellence Framework (REF), which has recently reported findings back to the universities. The following Guest Editorial by REF panel member Professor Richard Price outlines the current REF status and offers some thoughts for the future of radiography research which will also be relevant to our international colleagues.
References 1. Snaith B. Peer-review publication patterns: an international comparison of radiography journals. J Med Imag Radiat Sci 2013;44:37e43. 2. Elsevier. Radiography journal publisher's report. January 2015. 3. Harande YI. Author productivity and collaboration: an investigation of the relationship using the literature of technology. Libri 2001;51:124e7. 4. Yousefi-Nooraie R, Akbari-Kamrani M, Hanneman RA, Etemadi A. Association between co-authorship network and scientific productivity and impact indicators in academic medical research centers: a case study in Iran. Health Res Policy Syst 2008;6(9) [electronic version]. Available from: http://www.health-policysystems.com/content/6/1/9 [accessed 12.03.15].
Editorial / Radiography 21 (2015) 108e109 5. Nightingale JM, Marshall G. Citation analysis as a measure of article quality, journal influence and individual researcher performance. Radiography 2012;18: 60e7. 6. Snaith B. An evaluation of author productivity in international radiography journals 2004e2011. J Med Radiat Sci 2013;60(3):93e9. 7. Snaith B. Collaboration in radiography: a bibliometric analysis. Radiography 2012;18:270e4. 8. Lawson C, Cowling C. Social media: the next frontier for professional development in radiography. Radiography 2015;21(2):e74e80.
109
J. Nightingale School of Health Sciences, University of Salford, Salford M6 6PU, UK E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected].