GPP 2022: perspectives, sentiments, and feedback from the publications community

To identify the impact and integration of GPP 2022 guidelines on the work processes of publications developed in pharmaceutical, publishing, agency, and academic circles. A cross-sectional survey was conducted for 3 weeks from March 1–22, 2024 among medical publication professionals and healthcare researchers. The survey included questions that have been traditionally challenging in publication workstreams and were disseminated through major medical communications networking groups. The survey results were summarized as a percentage for each answer rounded to one decimal place. A total of 100 participants responded to the survey among whom 67.0% were familiar with the GPP 2022 guidelines. To mitigate potential misinterpretation risks, we considered only respondents familiar with the guidelines. More than half of the respondents (55.7%) felt that GPP 2022 was effective in addressing ethical considerations; 34.4% respondents agreed that GPP 2022 provided useful guidance on best practices in transparency and data-sharing. Most survey respondents (54.5%) agreed that the authorship and contributorship criteria were clear in GPP 2022. 37.3% of the survey respondents were familiar with publication extenders and felt that extenders added value to the dissemination of research findings; 39.2% were aware of plain-language summaries and 82.4% viewed them as vital for widespread research accessibility. The survey suggests a need to improve awareness and support for implementing transparency initiatives that aid in the publication process. Furthermore, although most respondents were aware of publication extenders, there was a need for clarification and harmonization of guidelines on publication extenders.

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28982533
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

GPP 2022: perspectives, sentiments, and feedback from the publications community

Figshare
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

GPP 2022: perspectives, sentiments, and feedback from the publications community

article en

Abstract

To identify the impact and integration of GPP 2022 guidelines on the work processes of publications developed in pharmaceutical, publishing, agency, and academic circles. A cross-sectional survey was conducted for 3 weeks from March 1–22, 2024 among medical publication professionals and healthcare researchers. The survey included questions that have been traditionally challenging in publication workstreams and were disseminated through major medical communications networking groups. The survey results were summarized as a percentage for each answer rounded to one decimal place. A total of 100 participants responded to the survey among whom 67.0% were familiar with the GPP 2022 guidelines. To mitigate potential misinterpretation risks, we considered only respondents familiar with the guidelines. More than half of the respondents (55.7%) felt that GPP 2022 was effective in addressing ethical considerations; 34.4% respondents agreed that GPP 2022 provided useful guidance on best practices in transparency and data-sharing. Most survey respondents (54.5%) agreed that the authorship and contributorship criteria were clear in GPP 2022. 37.3% of the survey respondents were familiar with publication extenders and felt that extenders added value to the dissemination of research findings; 39.2% were aware of plain-language summaries and 82.4% viewed them as vital for widespread research accessibility. The survey suggests a need to improve awareness and support for implementing transparency initiatives that aid in the publication process. Furthermore, although most respondents were aware of publication extenders, there was a need for clarification and harmonization of guidelines on publication extenders.

Figshare
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.