The study titled "Medical Theses and Derivative Articles: Dissemination Of Contents and Publication Patterns" conducted by Mercedes Echeverria, David Stuart, and Tobias Blanke investigates the dissemination of contents and publication patterns resulting from doctoral theses in universities. The research focuses on derivative articles that are published as a result of theses but have received little attention in previous studies. The authors aim to identify how derivative articles can be recognized through text analysis based on the full-text of medical theses and articles that share authorship. The methodology applied in this study involves exploiting the full-text articles according to organization of scientific discourse (IMRaD) using TurnItIn plagiarism tool. The findings reveal that the Discussion section's text similarity rate can differentiate between derivative and non-derivative articles. Additionally, it was found that 85% of derivative articles had their thesis author listed first, while supervisors participated as co-authors in 100% of such articles. Furthermore, 42% of authorship credit was retained by thesis authors in derivative articles compared to an average of 6.4 co-authors for non-derivative ones. The time differential regarding the year of thesis completion showed that 87.5% of derivative articles were published before or in the same year as their respective thesis completion date. These results suggest that doctoral students' publications are often derived from their dissertations, with supervisors playing a significant role in co-authoring these derivatives. Overall, this study sheds light on an important aspect of academic publishing within universities and highlights how derivative articles can be identified through text analysis methods. It provides valuable insights into publication patterns resulting from doctoral dissertations and emphasizes the significance of supervisor involvement in co-authoring derivatives.
This study looked at how people share their research after finishing a big project called a thesis in universities. They wanted to see if there were articles that came from the thesis but didn't get talked about much before. They used a tool to look at the words in the thesis and articles to see if they were similar. They found that most of these articles had the same person who wrote the thesis listed first as an author, and their teacher was also usually listed as an author too. These articles often came out around the same time as when the person finished their thesis. This study helps us understand more about how people share their research in universities.
Definitions
- Dissemination: sharing or spreading information
- Derivative: something that comes from something else
- Text analysis: looking closely at written words to find patterns or similarities
- Authorship: being listed as an author or writer of something
- Thesis: a big project someone does in university where they do research on a topic
Exploring the Dissemination of Contents and Publication Patterns from Doctoral Theses
The study titled "Medical Theses and Derivative Articles: Dissemination Of Contents and Publication Patterns" conducted by Mercedes Echeverria, David Stuart, and Tobias Blanke investigates the dissemination of contents and publication patterns resulting from doctoral theses in universities. This research focuses on derivative articles that are published as a result of theses but have received little attention in previous studies.
Objectives
The authors aim to identify how derivative articles can be recognized through text analysis based on the full-text of medical theses and articles that share authorship.
Methodology
The methodology applied in this study involves exploiting the full-text articles according to organization of scientific discourse (IMRaD) using TurnItIn plagiarism tool.
Findings
The findings reveal that the Discussion section's text similarity rate can differentiate between derivative and non-derivative articles. Additionally, it was found that 85% of derivative articles had their thesis author listed first, while supervisors participated as co-authors in 100% of such articles. Furthermore, 42% of authorship credit was retained by thesis authors in derivative articles compared to an average of 6.4 co-authors for non-derivative ones. The time differential regarding the year of thesis completion showed that 87.5% of derivative articles were published before or in the same year as their respective thesis completion date.
Conclusion
These results suggest that doctoral students' publications are often derived from their dissertations, with supervisors playing a significant role in co-authoring these derivatives. Overall, this study sheds light on an important aspect of academic publishing within universities and highlights how derivative articles can be identified through text analysis methods. It provides valuable insights into publication patterns resulting from doctoral dissertations and emphasizes the significance of supervisor involvement in co-authoring derivatives.
Implications for Future Research
This research has implications for future studies related to academic publishing within universities as well as identifying ways to recognize derivatives through text analysis methods . Further investigations should focus on exploring other aspects such as differences between disciplines when it comes to publication patterns resulting from doctoral dissertations , or examining different types/sources/platforms used for disseminating content . Additionally , more research is needed to understand how supervisors’ involvement affects student outcomes when it comes to publishing derivatives .
Doctoral theses are an important source of publication in universities, although little research has been carried out on the publications resulting from theses, on so-called derivative articles. This study investigates how derivative articles can be identified through a text analysis based on the full-text of a set of medical theses and the full-text of articles, with which they shared authorship. The text similarity analysis methodology applied consisted in exploiting the full-text articles according to organization of scientific discourse (IMRaD) using the TurnItIn plagiarism tool. The study found that the text similarity rate in the Discussion section can be used to discriminate derivative articles from non-derivative articles. Additional findings were: the first position of the thesis's author dominated in 85% of derivative articles, the participation of supervisors as coauthors occurred in 100% of derivative articles, the authorship credit retained by the thesis's author was 42% in derivative articles, the number of coauthors by article was 5 in derivative articles versus 6.4 coauthors, as average, in non-derivative articles and the time differential regarding the year of thesis completion showed that 87.5% of derivative articles were published before or in the same year of thesis completion.
