Close Menu

Over at Living the Scientific Life, GrrlScientist has a blog post on the puffed-up importance of journal impact factors and the "rampant citation bartering among scientists" that has resulted from it. GrrlScientist contends that impact factors are by no means a good way to measure the accuracy of any individual paper, and expounds on the problems that have ensued from scientists' focusing too much on publishing in journals with high impact factors.

 

To read the full story....

...and receive Daily News bulletins.

Already have a GenomeWeb or 360Dx account?
Login Now.

Don't have a GenomeWeb or 360Dx account?
Register for Free.

The Lancet has made changes to its peer-review process in response to its recent retraction of a COVID-19-related paper, Science reports.

The New York Times reports that a series of emails show how Department of Health and Human Services officials sought to silence the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

A new initiative aims to move Australia's genome sequencing labs onto one system, the Sydney Morning Herald reports.

In PLOS this week: recessive mutation tied to early-onset dilated cardiomyopathy, epigenetic analysis of lung adenocarcinoma, and more.