Hello guys im starting a narratove review project, but i got one query.

When we are reading a review, do we cite the review or the original source from where the review wrote it from

Chatgpt and Claude tell me that I should cite original discoveries but for well established facts like " smoking causes lung cancer" I should just cite the review i got it from

I joined as a postdoc researcher 4 months back. It took me some time to understand the proposal I was given to work on, I've joined someone else's project. Now they want me to finish systematic literature review asap. They wanted a draft ready by August. I wasn't aware of it so now they have asked me to finish it by October (the first draft). Right now I'm screening title/ abstract. I'll push through and finish it but how long do people usually take to finish slr?

Looking for tips to work efficiently.

Thanks!

Several years ago (around 2021), while I was still a student, I did substantial work on a research project. I wrote the code the whole analysis ran on, I prepared and cleaned the datasets, and I produced the figures that ended up in the final paper. When it was published, I was not listed as an author.

I did raise it at the time. I was told I couldn't be added because I wasn't affiliated with a university - I had just finished my degree. I was young, I'd just started a job, and I accepted that reason and moved on, I was so naive and didn't even search it on Google or ask on reddit just accepted what I was told.

Only recently (today actually 31st Aug 2026) did I properly understand that the reason I was given isn't valid: authorship is based on contribution, not on whether you happen to be attached to an institution at the moment. And when I finally read the published contributor statement closely, I realized the specific work I did is formally credited to two of the other authors. So it's not just that I'm missing - my actual contributions are attributed to other people.

I'm not going in empty-handed. I have version-controlled code with a commit history from that period, and emails from the time in which I shared the work with the group. So I can show what I did and roughly when.

I've now raised this with the full author group. A senior author's response was that they can't add me to an old paper, but that they could retract it instead.

That's the worst possible outcome for me - retraction erases the paper entirely and credits no one, so I'd end up with my work deleted and still uncredited. What I actually want is a correction that adds me and fixes the contributor statement, not a deletion.

There's also a wrinkle: the committee that would review this internally is at the same institution where the work was done and where one of the senior authors is on staff, so I'm not confident that process is neutral.

For anyone who's navigated something like this, I'd really value your experience:

How do you push for a correction / corrigendum that adds an omitted author, rather than a retraction?

If not all the authors will agree to it, what actually works from there?

How much weight does an internal committee at the authors' own institution carry - and can you take it to the journal/publisher independently of that?

Anything you wish you'd done differently in your own case?

I'm trying to handle this professionally and without attacking anyone personally. I just want my contribution recognized. Any advice appreciated.

\*Used AI to brush up wordings.

Looking to pay to join any article or journal paper about to be published. Preferably water resources. Urgent. Budget 500$

Hi everyone,

I recently completed my Master's and am preparing for PhD applications in Human-Centred AI, HCI, trustworthy AI, and healthcare AI. I already have 3 peer-reviewed publications (including 2 Q1 journal papers), but my previous supervisor's research area does not align with my current interests.

My questions:

1. Can I publish independently after graduation without involving any professor if the idea and work are entirely mine, considering that I am working in the industry now and have no institutional affiliation at the moment?
2. For PhD applications, would a conference paper (HCI/AI) or a journal paper be more valuable?
3. Is it realistic to pursue an HCI paper alone, or is finding an academic collaborator strongly recommended?

Visual Manuscript Editor Designed for Researchers. No LaTeX Expertise Required. Visit https://texpress.ai/

Hello guys, Im a medical student and over the summer me and my group of friends decided to write a comprehensive narrative review. It has been 3 months since then and we have the manuscript ready.

The supervisor we have is on vacation and wont be back till September 23rd.

He told us to look for journals that publish reviews

I tried finding some but I dont know the process and my supervisor is not replying to my message as he uses a different mobile over there:/.

Can anyone give me some guidance on what to do from here, like do I just submit the manuscript without him?

Its very confusing

AI-ChatNote is a free browser extension (Chrome, Firefox) for inline comments in AI chats.

No more copy+pasting. Simply hover on a paragraph, click and an editor for your comment opens. Save the comment and go on. The comments will then be added to your response to the AI.

It's free, works for all big platforms and it does help a lot in streamlining the whole AI chat experience.

Let me know if you have suggestions or found a bug. 👍

**PhD students publishing systematic/scoping reviews: how are you handling the review team?**

I’m a PhD student in a hybrid program (mostly online with some in-person components), and I’m hoping to approach my upcoming literature reviews as publishable work rather than completing them solely as program requirements.

I’ve been digging into PRISMA, JBI guidance, and journal requirements, and I’m getting a little stuck on the practical side of building a review team.

My understanding is that PRISMA itself is primarily a reporting guideline and does not simply state “you must have X number of authors/reviewers.” JBI guidance, however, emphasizes independent screening and checks and balances to reduce bias. When I look at published reviews, university guidance, blogs, etc., I also frequently see recommendations for multiple reviewers, sometimes with three people involved so disagreements can be resolved by a third reviewer.

For those of you who have published systematic or scoping reviews during your PhD:

How many people were actually on your review team?

\-Did two people independently screen every title/abstract and full text, or did you use another approach?

\-Was your third reviewer only used to resolve disagreements?

\-For scoping reviews specifically, have you successfully published one where you were the primary/only screener with some form of verification by another person?

\-How did you find co-authors/reviewers if your program did not automatically provide a research team?

\-At what point did your co-authors become involved: protocol development, screening, full-text review, extraction, manuscript writing, etc.?

\-Did the journal ultimately care about the number of reviewers, or was the bigger concern that you had a defensible method for reducing selection bias?

I’m especially interested in experiences from PhD students who had to build their own review team rather than already being embedded in a lab or research group.

I have faculty I can approach, but before I start recruiting people, I’m trying to understand what is actually necessary versus what is simply considered ideal practice.
Would love to hear what worked for you, especially if you’ve successfully published a scoping review or systematic review as a doctoral student.

TIA!

Bria

Hi all! I have submitted a paper proposal to a journal I really value (French literature) and was pleased that it was accepted. The editorial guidelines were only communicated afterwards, however, and the maximum character count is 27,000, which I guess must be 3000-4000 words. I have already spent two months revising and editing the paper, and am still sitting at 30,000 characters (4780 words). I feel like cutting anymore text would denature the paper. Out of curiosity, I sampled a few of their past publications and they ranged from 27000 to 34000 characters. Do you believe it is worth asking if they might consider the slightly longer paper, or might that be considered unprofessional?
Thank you kindly!

I’m a rising junior trying to start an independent research project for science-fair/ISEF-level competition. My school doesn’t have a research program, so I’m figuring out the process myself.

My dad is an electrical automation engineer and can mentor me, and I have access to a professional electrical engineering lab where he is testing a novel distribution-grid switch. I plan to compare the experimental switch with the standard MOAB switch used widely in the grid.

Some potential areas I’m considering are:
DC power consumption
Backup-battery endurance
Battery aging/health and how it affects switch reliability
Voltage/current sensing accuracy
SCADA communication and functionality during an outage

I’m trying to do literature review before finalizing my research question, so I can find a research gap
and create a more specific research question. My problem is that I don’t really know how to approach literature review.

How do I go from broad literature → specific subtopic → research gap → research question?

How many papers should I realistically read for a high-school research project?

What databases/search tools should I use?

How do I keep track of papers and organize what I’ve learned?

What is the end goal of literature review/what are the mains things I should be looking to get from doing it?

Hi, I submitted a revised version of my manuscript (major revision) 9 weeks ago. It was under review by the reviewers for 6-7 weeks and then awaiting decision for 8 days. Is it a bad sign? does it mean my manuscript will undergo ​another round of revision? 🥲🥲since if it is a direct acceptance, it will take less longer. The journal used ScholarOne. Please advise. thanks ​