As the availability and performance of AI for language editing and translation continues to improve, we can imagine a future in which everyone can use their own language to write, assess and read science. The question is, how can we achieve it?

Given that science is the key driver of human progress, improving the efficiency of scientific investigation and yielding more credible and more useful research results can translate to major benefits.

Do lay people and scientists themselves recognize that scientists are human and therefore prone to human fallibilities such as error, bias, and even dishonesty?

Enthusiasm for using Twitter as a source of data in the social sciences extends to measuring the impact of research with Twitter data being a key component in the new altmetrics approach.

Openness requires trust in close peers, but not necessarily in research community or society at large.

A cross-sectional comparison of characteristics of potential predatory, legitimate open access, and legitimate subscription-based biomedical journals.

Elsevier’s Open Access journals as of 2016.

Highly productive researchers have significantly higher probability to produce top cited papers.

A basic set of rules to improve figure design and to explain some of the common pitfalls.

This guide covers three major topics in open science (data, code, and publications) and offers practical advice as well as highlighting advantages of adopting more open research practices.

John Ioannidis argues that problem base, context placement, information gain, pragmatism, patient centeredness, value for money, feasibility, and transparency define useful clinical research. He suggests most clinical research is not useful and reform is overdue.

A list of 10 rules with researchers in mind: researchers having some knowledge of statistics, possibly with one or more statisticians available in their building, or possibly with a healthy do-it-yourself attitude and a handful of statistical packages on their laptops.

A Study of Gender Differences in Contributorship.

Since the 1950s, the number of doctorate recipients has risen dramatically in the United States. In this paper, we investigate whether the longevity of doctorate recipients’ publication careers has changed.

The transparency of the peer-review process is an indicator of peer-review quality.

Replication studies are rare and only a few had their data included in a subsequent systematic review or meta-analysis.

Study examining whether NIH funded articles that were archived in PMC after the release of the 2008 NIH Public Access Policy show greater scholarly impact than comparable articles not archived in PMC.

Biology top journals share original data at the highest rate, and physics top journals share at the lowest rate.

An analysis of the education of researchers that constitute the main Brazilian research groups, using data on about 6,000 researchers.

Research policies that better incentivise data sharing are needed to improve the quality of research results and foster scientific progress.

As interest in and use of article-level metrics grows, it is critical to ensure secure and reliable data that is trustworthy and can be used by all.

Laureates produce fewer papers but with higher average citations, more sole-authored papers both before and after winning the Prize, and have a lower number of coauthors across their entire careers than the matched group.

Facebook likes only predict citations in the psychological area but not in the non-psychological area of business or in the field of life sciences.

In the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.