Programme

18 June, 14.00-17.00, Huygens HG01.060 (first floor, central corridor)

14.00 Introductions

14.30 Relevance Evaluation of Animal studies for Clinical Translation
Carlijn Hooijmans (Meta-research/UMC) and Simon Lohse (ISiS/Science)

“Presentation on the background for and the core idea of our ZonMw proposal, including open questions that will need to be answered along the way. Perhaps also a little reflection on interdisciplinary collaboration under time pressure.”

15.00 Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past – the case of the journal Bioengineered
René Aquarius (Meta-research/UMC)

“Introduction: Taylor & Francis journal Bioengineered has been targeted by paper mills. The goal of this study is to identify problematic articles published in Bioengineered during the period 2010 to 2024.
Methods: Dimensions was used to search for articles that contained the terms mouse OR mice OR rat OR rats in title or abstract, published in Bioengineered between January 1st 2010 to December 31st 2024. All articles were assessed by eye and by using software to detect inappropriate image duplication and manipulation. An article was classified as problematic if it contained inappropriate image duplication or manipulation or had been previously retracted. Problematic articles were reported on PubPeer by the authors, if they had not been reported previously. All included articles were assessed for post-publication editorial decisions.
Results: We have excluded all articles published in 2024 from further analysis, as these were all retraction notices. We assessed the remaining 878 articles, of which 226 (25.7%) were identified as problematic, of which 35 had been previously retracted. One retracted article was later de-retracted. One article received a correction. None of the included articles received an expression of concern or the Taylor & Francis under investigation pop-up.
Conclusions: Taylor & Francis lack of editorial action has left the scientific community vulnerable to reading and citing hundreds of problematic articles published in Bioengineered. To uphold scientific integrity, Taylor & Francis should use the findings of this study as a starting point to systematically identify all compromised articles in Bioengineered and take appropriate editorial action.”
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.21267

15.30 Coffee break: bring your billy cup!
The supply of coffee is endless, but RROSA is penniless.

15.45 The (in)visibility of corrections in scientific databases and literature tools
Wytske Hepkema (ISiS/Science)
To what extent are non-trivial corrections to scientific publications visible to users of the scientific literature, and in the databases and tools that give access to this literature?

16.15 Leaving for More or Settling for Less: Gendered Salary Trajectories after Leaving Academia
Anne Maaike Mulders¹, Christoph Janietz², Bas Hofstra¹, Jochem Tolsma^1,2
(¹ Sociology/RU; ² Sociology/RUG)

“As the population of PhDs increases, a growing share of researchers find employment outside of academia after doctorate receipt. This attrition is higher among women. While prior studies find that doctoral recipients who work outside academia tend to earn more, some only find these wage premiums for men. Such findings are primarily based on scholars who leave academia immediately after the PhD where wage inequality is often examined over a limited timeframe. We extend on these studies by examining the gendered salary developments among PhDs who have started a career in academia over a period up to 17 years after obtaining doctorate. We use survey data from 4,576 individuals who obtained doctorate at universities in the Netherlands, linked to longitudinal Dutch register data on salaries, job characteristics, and family composition. We detail our findings by examining different push and pull factors (i.e. temporary employment, work hours, having a young child, disciplinary background) that explain why men and women’s salaries may develop differently following a transition out of academia. Our results show that leaving academia initially increases wages, but slows wage growth over time. We find that women experience stronger immediate wage gains, but slower wage growth after a transition out of academia than men. While leaving academia may offer short-term financial benefits, particularly to women working part-time or on temporary contracts, it may ultimately limit their salary progression by restricting opportunities for promotion.”

16.45 What do we want RROSA to be?

17.00 Drinks at CultuurCafé

Back to RROSA