2012至2023年臺、韓、中醫學論文發表於疑慮期刊之狀況

Abstract

臺灣多間醫學機構接連發出公告，不推薦研究人員在特定出版社、「不以審查人認定之科學重要性作為論文接受與否之依據」之期刊或是巨型期刊上出版。本研究為深入分析此情況，根據國立臺灣大學醫學院研究發展分處 (2022)的公告，定義出兩類疑慮期刊。並以亞洲區疑慮期刊文獻數量最高的中國和韓國，做為臺灣的比較對象。總上所述，本研究計畫了解在2012至2023年期間，臺、韓、中醫學文獻的疑慮期刊發表情況，與醫學分科、子分科與醫學機構在疑慮期刊中的分布。 根據研究結果，臺、韓、中醫學文獻在疑慮期刊與非疑慮期刊的分布，以及在第一類與第二類疑慮期刊間的分布皆呈現顯著差異，顯示三者在疑慮期刊上的醫學文獻發表具有不同的分布特徵。在疑慮與非疑慮文獻分布的表現上，以疑慮期刊文獻的數量上遠低於模型預期值，且其疑慮期刊文獻占比亦為最低的中國表現相對優秀；與中國表現相近的韓國居中；疑慮期刊文獻數量高於模型預期，且其疑慮期刊文獻占比最高的臺灣表現居後。 在疑慮期刊文獻歷年分布的部分，臺、韓、中在2013年皆有大幅度的成長，而後穩定增加。直到在2019年至2022年迎來疑慮期刊文獻發表最蓬勃的年段，而且2022年皆為臺、韓、中疑慮期刊比率的最高點。但在2023年三者於疑慮文獻篇數和比率上皆明顯大幅度降低。 在第一類疑慮期刊中，中國多發表於 Frontiers Media，顯示其為具高度代表性與影響力的出版社。而臺灣與韓國則以 MDPI 出版社為主。在第二類疑慮期刊的分析中，臺灣的第二類疑慮文獻在PLOS ONE上出版最多；而韓國則是在SCIENTIFIC REPORTS與MEDICINE兩本期刊上最多；中國則是在PLOS ONE、SCIENTIFIC REPORTS與MEDICINE上數量相當接近地出版。 根據臺韓中不同醫學分科作者在疑慮期刊發表量上的分析，以「內科」與「外科」醫學分科的作者占比最多。而臺韓中在「內科」與「外科」的前三子分科中，有所重複者為「內科」的「腫瘤醫學」；「外科」為「一般外科」、「口腔醫學」與「胸腔外科」。從子分科觀察，在疑慮期刊發表上中國以「東方醫學」子分科之占比最高；韓國第一名則是「藥學」；臺灣則以「公共衛生」居冠。而在臺韓中所有前五成子分科之中，「東方醫學」是唯一在評估各子分科作者在「疑慮篇數占總篇數%」指標中，於臺韓中皆高於 20% 的子分科，顯示該科別作者在不同國家均較易受到疑慮期刊影響。 臺灣醫學機構的疑慮論文占總論文數的比例相對較高，整體介於20%以上。當中又以長庚紀念醫院為臺灣醫學機構中在疑慮期刊上發表論文數量最多之醫學機構。在韓國，以首爾大學、延世大學及兩者之附設醫院，居疑慮期刊發表的第一名與第二名。在中國大學（含醫院）的疑慮論文數量最多者為上海交通大學。不過上述提及之醫學機構，由於其總論文數量也明顯較高，因此疑慮論文占比並無明顯高於其他的醫學機構。而以疑慮論文占比來說，中國與韓國比例分布較為接近，大抵分布在10%至20%上下。由此可見，相較於臺灣，中國與韓國醫學機構在疑慮論文占比上的分布偏低。 根據各醫學機構中，累積疑慮期刊文獻篇數占比接近五成的醫學子分科分析，在臺灣疑慮期刊文獻篇數排名前六之大學中，以中國醫藥大學「東方醫學」占比最高。並在前六名大學中有所重複的子分科為「藥學」，彰顯藥學子分科作者在疑慮期刊上的發表具有相當的貢獻。而在臺灣的附設醫院部分，以中國醫藥大學附設醫院「醫學研究」占比最高。在韓國前六名大學中，在疑慮期刊發表上占比最高者為慶熙大學之「東方醫學」；在醫院部分，以釜山大學附設醫院「生物醫學」占比最高。中國疑慮期刊發表前六名大學的子分科發表情況，占比最高者為中山大學「腫瘤醫學」；醫院部分，則是以中南大學附設醫院「老年醫學」占比最高。最後，中國前六名大學（含附設醫院）皆涵蓋之子分科為「一般外科」、「腫瘤醫學」與「公共衛生」，顯示此三子分科在這六所大學（含附設醫院）於疑慮期刊發表中具有顯著的貢獻與影響力。

Multiple medical institutions in Taiwan have issued statements advising researchers against publishing in certain publishers, journals that do not base acceptance decisions on the perceived scientific significance as judged by reviewers, or mega journals. In order to further analyze this situation, this study defines two types of questionable journals based on the announcement of the Office of Research and Development of the National Taiwan University College of Medicine (2022). China and South Korea, which have the highest number of articles published in questionable journals in Asia, are used as comparison objects for Taiwan. In summary, this study aims to examine the publication of medical literature in questionable journals in Taiwan, South Korea, and China from 2012 to 2023, and the distribution of medical specialties, subspecialties, and medical institutions in questionable journals. According to the research results, the distribution of medical literature in Taiwan, South Korea, and China in questionable journals and non-questionable journals, as well as the distribution between the first and second categories of questionable journals, showed significant differences. Regarding the distribution of questionable versus non-questionable publications, China demonstrated a relatively strong performance, as the observed number of publications in questionable journals was substantially lower than the number expected by the model, and the proportion of such publications was the lowest among the countries analyzed. South Korea, with a performance comparable to that of China, ranked in the intermediate range. Conversely, Taiwan exhibited the weakest performance, with both the number and proportion of questionable journal publications exceeding the model's expectations and representing the highest levels overall. In terms of the distribution of questionable journal articles over the years, Taiwan, South Korea, and China all experienced a significant increase in 2013, and then steadily increased. Until 2019 to 2022, the most prosperous period for the publication of questionable journal articles was ushered in, and 2022 was the peak year for the proportion of questionable journals. However, in 2023, the number and proportion of questionable articles in three countries all dropped significantly. In the first category of questionable journals, China published more in Frontiers Media, showing that it is a highly representative and influential publisher. Taiwan and South Korea are mainly published by MDPI publishers. In the second category of questionable journals, Taiwan’s contributions are mostly found in PLOS ONE; while South Korea is most in SCIENTIFIC REPORTS and MEDICINE; China is published in PLOS ONE, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS and MEDICINE in a very similar number. An analysis of the number of publications in questionable journals by authors in various medical specialties in Taiwan, South Korea, and China shows that those in the specialties of “Internal Medicine” and “Surgery” account for the largest proportion. In these medical specialties, the top three subspecialties that overlap in Taiwan, South Korea, and China are “Oncology” in “Internal Medicine”; “General Surgery”, “Oral Medicine” and “Thoracic Surgery” in “Surgery”. When focusing solely on the subspecialties level, China has the highest proportion of “Oriental Medicine” in questionable journal publications; South Korea ranks first with “Pharmacy”; Taiwan ranks first with “Public Health”. Among all the top 50% subspecialties in three countries, “Oriental Medicine” is the only one with a value exceeding 20% in the metric assessing author involvement in questionable journal publications, suggesting that authors in this field may be more susceptible to questionable publishing practices across countries. Medical institutions in Taiwan exhibit a relatively high overall proportion of publications in questionable journals. In Taiwan, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital has the highest number of such publications. In South Korea, Seoul National University, Yonsei University and their affiliated hospitals ranked first and second in the number of questionable publications. Among Chinese universities, including affiliated hospitals, Shanghai Jiao Tong University has the highest number of questionable publications. However, since the total number of publications published by the aforementioned medical institutions is significantly higher, the proportion of questionable publications remains relatively low. Furthermore, compared to Taiwan, Chinese and Korean medical institutions exhibit a lower proportion of questionable publications. An analysis of medical subspecialties accounting for nearly 50% of questionable journal publications across medical institutions shows that, among the top six universities in Taiwan with the highest number of such publications, China Medical University has the highest proportion of these publications in the subspecialty of “Oriental Medicine”; in terms of affiliated hospitals, “Medical Research” of China Medical University Hospital has the highest proportion. In South Korea, the one with the highest proportion is “Oriental Medicine” of Kyung Hee University; in terms of affiliated hospitals, “Biomedical Science” of Pusan National University Hospital has the highest proportion. Among universities in China, the highest proportion is associated with “Oncology” at Sun Yat-sen University, while in affiliated hospitals, “Geriatric Medicine” at Central South University Hospital ranks highest.