Mario Malički

ORCID: 0000-0003-0698-1930
Publications
Citations
Views
---
Saved
---
About
Contact & Profiles
Research Areas
  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Academic Publishing and Open Access
  • Health and Medical Research Impacts
  • Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Research Data Management Practices
  • Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Social Media in Health Education
  • Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Ethics in medical practice
  • Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Impact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
  • Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • COVID-19 and healthcare impacts
  • Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
  • Career Development and Diversity
  • Breastfeeding Practices and Influences
  • Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Obesity and Health Practices
  • Biomedical and Engineering Education

Stanford University
2020-2024

Innovative Research (United States)
2023-2024

Protein Metrics (United States)
2020-2024

Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
2019-2023

Leiden University
2023

Azerbaijan University of Architecture and Construction
2023

Amsterdam University Medical Centers
2017-2022

RELX Group (Netherlands)
2022

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
2022

University of Split
2012-2022

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to test the usefulness an infographic in translation knowledge about health information from a Cochrane systematic review lay and professional populations comparison plain language summary (PLS) scientific abstract (SA).Study Design SettingWe conducted three parallel randomized trials with university students (n = 171), consumers 99), doctors 64), examine effect different formats on presented review, reading experience, perceived user-friendliness. In...

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.003 article EN cc-by-nc-nd Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2017-12-18

Abstract To gain insight into changes of scholarly journals’ recommendations, we conducted a systematic review studies that analysed Instructions to Authors (ItAs). We summarised results 153 studies, and meta-analysed how often ItAs addressed: 1) authorship, 2) conflicts interest, 3) data sharing, 4) ethics approval, 5) funding disclosure, 6) International Committee Medical Journal Editors’ Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts. For each topic found large between-study heterogeneity. Here,...

10.1038/s41467-021-26027-y article EN cc-by Nature Communications 2021-10-05

Calls have been made for improving transparency in conducting and reporting research, work climates, preventing detrimental research practices. To assess attitudes practices regarding these topics, we sent a survey to authors, reviewers, editors. We received 3,659 (4.9%) responses out of 74,749 delivered emails. found no significant differences between authors’, reviewers’, editors’ towards or their perceptions climates. Undeserved authorship was perceived by all groups as the most prevalent...

10.1371/journal.pone.0270054 article EN cc-by PLoS ONE 2023-03-08

Dissemination of research findings is central to integrity and promoting discussion new knowledge its potential for translation into practice policy. We investigated the frequency format dissemination trial participants patient groups.Survey authors clinical trials indexed in PubMed 2014-2015.Questionnaire emailed 19 321 authors; 3127 responses received (16%). Of these trials, 2690 had human 1818 enrolled individual patients. Among 1818, 498 (27%) reported having disseminated results...

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032701 article EN cc-by-nc BMJ Open 2019-10-01

<ns4:p><ns4:bold>Background</ns4:bold>: Never before have clinical trials drawn as much public attention those testing interventions for COVID-19. We aimed to describe the worldwide COVID-19 research response and its evolution over first 100 days of pandemic.</ns4:p><ns4:p><ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold>Descriptive analysis planned, ongoing or completed by April 9, 2020 any intervention treat prevent COVID-19, systematically identified in trial registries, preprint servers, literature...

10.12688/f1000research.26707.2 preprint EN cc-by F1000Research 2020-10-26

<ns4:p><ns4:bold>Background</ns4:bold>: Never before have clinical trials drawn as much public attention those testing interventions for COVID-19. We aimed to describe the worldwide COVID-19 research response and its evolution over first 100 days of pandemic.</ns4:p><ns4:p><ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold>Descriptive analysis planned, ongoing or completed by April 9, 2020 any intervention treat prevent COVID-19, systematically identified in trial registries, preprint servers, literature...

10.12688/f1000research.26707.1 preprint EN cc-by F1000Research 2020-10-02

In light of increasing calls for transparent reporting research and prevention detrimental practices, we conducted a cross-sectional machine-assisted analysis representative sample scientific journals' instructions to authors (ItAs) across all disciplines. We investigated addressing 19 topics related transparency in integrity. Only three were addressed more than one third ItAs: conflicts interest, plagiarism, the type peer review journal employs. Health Life Sciences journals, journals...

10.1371/journal.pone.0222157 article EN cc-by PLoS ONE 2019-09-05

Abstract An antenatal/postnatal intervention involving proactive telephone support and written materials was conducted among primiparas. Four hundred women, from the Split‐Dalmatia County, Croatia, were randomized between November 2013 December 2016 into three groups: (IG), active control (ACG) standard care (SCG). Primary outcome exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included difficulties, attitudes towards infant feeding, self‐efficacy social support. Practice staff...

10.1111/mcn.12948 article EN cc-by Maternal and Child Nutrition 2020-01-13

Background Reviewers rarely comment on the same aspects of a manuscript, making it difficult to properly assess manuscripts’ quality and peer review process. The goal this pilot study was evaluate structured implementation by: 1) exploring whether how reviewers answered questions, 2) analysing reviewer agreement, 3) comparing that agreement before review, 4) further enhancing piloted set questions. Methods Structured consisting nine questions in August 2022 220 Elsevier journals. We randomly...

10.7717/peerj.17514 article EN cc-by PeerJ 2024-06-25

AimTo assess attitudes of students and their parents toward basic life support (BLS) training in primary schools, along with perceptions students' fears applying BLS.MethodsIn October 2011, a specifically designed, voluntary anonymous questionnaire was distributed to 7th 8th grade two schools Split, Croatia. Completed questionnaires were analyzed determine the validity scale, sex group differences individual items whole scale.ResultsThe completed by 301 school children 361 parents....

10.3325/cmj.2013.54.376 article EN cc-by-nc-nd Croatian Medical Journal 2013-08-01

Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport fail publish certain types findings, and impact this may have, received little attention.A survey was delivered online gather data regarding non-dissemination dissemination bias in research. We invited relevant stakeholders through...

10.1371/journal.pone.0159290 article EN cc-by PLoS ONE 2016-08-03

Abstract Background Published studies in the life and health sciences often employ sample sizes that are too small to detect realistic effect sizes. This shortcoming increases rate of false positives negatives, giving rise a potentially misleading scientific record. To address this shortcoming, many researchers now use point-and-click software run size calculations. Objective We aimed (1) estimate how published articles report using G*Power calculation software; (2) assess whether these...

10.1101/2024.07.15.24310458 preprint EN public-domain medRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) 2024-07-16

Background: Public information on US clinical trials is shared through the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. This study's goal was to determine prospective registration, results reporting, trial registration number and publication accessibility status for with primary completion dates from 2014 2017 affiliated seven California universities. Methods: We identified investigators, sponsors, or responsible parties universities searched their publications manually. then used semi-automatic methods...

10.1101/2025.04.07.25325421 preprint EN cc-by 2025-04-09

ABSTRACT Background Reviewers rarely comment on the same aspects of a manuscript, making it difficult to properly assess manuscripts’ quality and peer review process. It was goal this pilot study evaluate structured implementation by: 1) exploring if how reviewers answered questions, 2) analysing reviewer agreement, 3) comparing that agreement before review, 4) further enhancing piloted set questions. Methods Structured consisting 9 questions in August 2022 220 Elsevier journals. We randomly...

10.1101/2024.02.01.578440 preprint EN cc-by bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) 2024-02-04

Benjamin Kasenda, MD; Erik von Elm, MD, MSc; John You, Anette Blümle, PhD; Yuki Tomonaga, Ramon Saccilotto, Alain Amstutz, BSc; Theresa Bengough, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Mihaela Stegert, Kari A. O. Tikkinen, Ignacio Neumann, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Markus Faulhaber, Sohail M. Mulla, Dominik Mertz, Elie Akl, PhD, MPH; Dirk Bassler, Jason W. Busse, DC, Ferreira-González, Francois Lamontagne, Nordmann, Viktoria Gloy, Heike Raatz, Lorenzo Moja, Rachel Rosenthal, Shanil Ebrahim, Stefan Schandelmaier,...

10.1001/jama.2014.143 article EN JAMA 2014-03-11

Attitudes towards open peer review, data and use of preprints influence scientists’ engagement with those practices. Yet there is a lack validated questionnaires that measure these attitudes. The goal our study was to construct validate such questionnaire it assess attitudes Croatian scientists. We first developed 21-item called Open sharing , preprinting peer-review (ATOPP), which had reliable four-factor structure, measured data, preprint servers, in small scientific communities. then used...

10.1371/journal.pone.0244529 article EN cc-by PLoS ONE 2021-06-21

Scientific journals may counter the misuse, misreporting, and misinterpretation of statistics by providing guidance to authors. We described nature prevalence statistical at 15 (top-ranked Impact Factor) in each 22 scientific disciplines across five high-level domains (N = 330 journals). The frequency varied (Health & Life Sciences: 122/165 journals, 74%; Multidisciplinary: 9/15 60%; Social 8/30 27%; Physical 21/90 23%; Formal 0/30 0%). In one discipline (Clinical Medicine), was provided all...

10.1080/00031305.2022.2143897 article EN The American Statistician 2022-11-08

Preprints have been increasingly used in biomedical science, and a key feature of many platforms is public commenting. The content these comments, however, has not well studied, it unclear whether they resemble those found journal peer review.To describe the comments on bioRxiv medRxiv preprint platforms.In this cross-sectional study, preprints posted 2020 were accessed through each platform's application programming interface March 29, 2021, random sample containing between 1 20 was...

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.31410 article EN cc-by-nc-nd JAMA Network Open 2023-08-30
Coming Soon ...