JRTDD newest issue 1, Volumen 4 for 2021 has already been published

Dear colleagues and readers,
I would like to inform you that 2nd issue of the 3rd volume of Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is published online today (October 25th, 2021). A total number of 5 papers are published. Next Issue 2, Vol. 4 of JRTDD for the 2021 is expected to be published until December 30th, 2021.

Accessing JRTDD Online
To view a current articles which appears online, please visit this LINK.
You, your colleagues, and students will be able to view articles (Full-Text PDF and Online First Full-text PDF) and have unlimited access to the journal (JRTDD is an open access, international, peer reviewed and non for profit journal).
Citing Articles Using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
When citing articles from JRTDD, we encourage you to use article’s DOI in addition to traditional citation information. This is an industry standard, a link-resolving system that allows any link to remain “persistent” even if the location of the article changes at some point in the future. Hence, when you are quoting the link for an article, you should always quote the DOI rather than the URL of our home page.
Useful Online Features for Authors
Your registration in online submission (http://jrtdd.com/submit-your-manuscript/) will enable you with continuous information connected with JRTDD. We encourage you to share publications from JRTDD platform and online registration with your colleagues. You can feel free to share every publication on social media.
We invite you to the content of the JRTDD and we think that you will consider publishing with Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities.

Call for papers for Vol.4, Issue 2 is open until November 30th.

Suggested topics include but are not limited to

  • ReAttach Therapy,
  • Autism Spectrum Disorders,
  • Neuropsychological Research,
  • Medical Aspects of Disability,
  • Special Education Research,
  • Rehabilitation Research,
  • Social Aspects of Disability,
  • Master theses and PhD theses in the field,
  • Book Reviews in the field.

If you have any questions or you face problems with paper submission, please feel free to contact us: journaljrtdd@gmail.com


JRTDD Editor-in-chief

4 Steps to increase open access journal impact

“How long does it take to get a Journal Impact Factor?” That’s one of the first questions we often hear from new or developing open access (OA) journals.

For your first Journal Impact Factor (JIF), it takes about three years — because your JIF will be based on the number of citable items from the last calendar year (e.g., 2020) and the two years of publication data before that (e.g., 2018 and 2019). But when it comes to increasing and demonstrating journal impact, is it really all about the JIF?

No, there is so much more.

In this blog post, we look beyond the JIF as the sole metric for success and discuss some alternative measures to show journal impact, as well as tips for implementing them.

1. Start with the basics

The first step to increasing the impact of any journal is ensuring researchers can easily find its content in related online searches, and integral to that is producing and disseminating quality article-level metadata. Content registration services such as Crossref have evolved to serve as discovery platforms with citation and reference linking tools. By prioritizing making clean, correct, and rich metadata deposits to them, you can make your articles more discoverable. Crossref metadata is also used by third-party databases/vendors, like Kudos and Altmetric, as a vital component of their services, expanding the discovery value of Crossref metadata deposits. So start by making a plan to produce and submit quality core and, where possible, enriched metadata to the DOI registration service of your choice. Here are five of the top rich metadata elements to focus on.

Next, consider where you are indexing your content. And are you working with aggregators to host the abstracts or full text of your articles? Applying to have your articles indexed with the main directories in your subject discipline and those for OA journals, like the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), as well as to have your content added to relevant aggregators, can further increase its discoverability. This will, in turn, help you reach a wider audience, improve your article citation prospects, and gain access to different impact assessment tools provided by indexes and aggregators.

So, where is the first place to start? Review the journal evaluation processes for the indexing and aggregation services you are part of or would like to apply for, like Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and the DOAJ, to cross-check your journal against their requirements and recommendations. Then develop a plan to apply for or take steps to improve the quality of your deposits to those indexes/aggregators, setting priorities based on the requirements and recommendations that are most feasible for your team to implement in the short term. The more achievable your goals are in the near future, the more likely you’ll be to reach them.

2. Provide post-publication support to authors

In addition to taking steps to ensure your journal articles are discoverable, promoting them is another way to increase their potential impact. Due to resource limitations and the volume of articles published in journals, it’s often not feasible for publishers to give each one the same level of marketing attention as, say, a book. As an alternative to doing individual promotion for every article you publish, consider ways to enable and encourage self-promotion from your author community to increase the impact of their work. Some ideas to explore include:

  • When an article is published, send its corresponding and co-authors an email with links to hints and tips or a designated toolkit webpage about how they can increase the impact of their work. You can also include example text for communicating article highlights via email and social media. Discover how Antony Williams was able to breathe new life into older, still relevant articles with a bit of time investment and self-promotion.
  • Send a trackable article link to authors so you have more transparency about what promotion they are doing and where.
  • Commission high-profile researchers to write review articles and give them a higher level of marketing activity.
  • Commission content on trending topics with a call for papers — these are often the most read and cited papers.
  • Run special issues and article collections around trending themes to increase the impact of older, yet still relevant articles.
  • To get research out faster and help increase citations and sharing, review your time to publish against your competitors and how your processes can be improved without compromising on quality, editorial practices, and ethics. And publish articles online prior to them being made available in an issue.

3. Adjust your editorial strategy

We have already covered some areas to improve the quality and discoverability of your journal’s content, but let us showcase other ways you can adjust your existing editorial strategy to improve the impact of your journal. Below are key considerations:

  • Do you want to target a specific audience, and, if so, how is that audience currently represented? E.g., how international are your author community, editors, and editorial board members? What can you do to expand your reach?
  • How consistently are you releasing new content? Should it be more frequent or even less? How saturated is the community with this type of research? Do you need to tighten your scope or increase your issues because you have such high-quality submissions?
  • How is your journal currently positioned? What makes your journal’s story compelling? What would you tell a potential Editor in Chief if you only have 30 seconds in an elevator with them?
  • Are you doing marketing that is most effective to improve the impact of your journal and its content? Make sure you test and adjust to best fit your target audience. You will have more impact and resonate with your audience when you understand them better.
  • What best practice examples are you using to inform your strategy, and how are you getting up-to-date industry learnings? Membership bodies and service providers are often a great way to find out what others are doing.
  • Have you just launched your OA journal and want to increase the number of quality submissions, readership, and citations? You may choose to make it diamond/platinum OA — free to read and free to publish in — to generate more awareness, submissions, and citations for your JIF and CiteScore, as well as having a positive impact on article altmetrics.

4. Think beyond the Journal Impact Factor

For years, the original purpose of the JIF has been misconstrued, resulting in misuse of the metric. What was once “citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation“ has now become a “gold standard” in journal evaluation, and not without its drawbacks. Nowadays, publishers include JIFs on their journal homepages to verify their reputability. And the JIF is often used as a “quality” metric for institutions to determine where their researchers should publish. This combination of actions creates huge competition between researchers to publish in “high-impact” journals, in some cases instead of smaller titles with more specialist communities where the research could likely have greater influence.

But that doesn’t mean the cycle of JIF-based assessment has to continue, and the JIF is certainly not the only factor in journal evaluation. As Marie McVeigh of Clarivate Analytics recently explained when speaking to WoS’ indexing criteria, “…we do a data-driven, not metrics-driven, analysis of the value of publications to their communities as well as to the literature.” So it’s important to remember the JIF is only one evaluation tool. For a more comprehensive picture of journal impact, it’s imperative to look to other measures.

The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) is a prime example of an initiative born out of the academic community’s desire to change how research impact is measured. It’s about advancing more robust approaches to impact analysis that put data into context.

The Centre of Open Science’s Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines is one newer example of how publishers are displaying editorial rigor and transparency as a means of communicating journal value as well as impact metrics. TOP contains eight modular standards with three levels of stringency.

So what other means of communicating and measuring journal impact are available?

  • Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines: As discussed, TOP is an emerging framework for displaying journals’ adherence to publishing best practices, which any publication can adopt.
  • Eigenfactor and Article influence: An academic research project that uses network analysis algorithms and five years of citation data to evaluate the impact of journals and articles.
  • Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): From the National Institute of Health (NIH), this metric measures the scientific influence of individual articles by field.
  • Source Normalized Impact Per Paper (SNIP): A metric meant to account for the subject-specific differences in citation practices, powered by Scopus.
  • SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): A metric for measuring the scientific influence of scholarly journals, powered by Scopus.
  • CiteScore: This is essentially Elsevier’s equivalent of the JIF, which looks at the last three years of publication data.
  • scite: A platform for discovering and evaluating scientific articles via Smart Citations.
  • Journal usage data (i.e., HTML page views, full-text article downloads, turnaways, demographics, etc.): You can track journal analytics to showcase readership numbers online and better understand reader behavior to inform publication decisions. Keep in mind — if you have content hosted on aggregation platforms (e.g., ProQuest and EBSCO), OAPEN, preprints like Arxiv, and archives like PubMed, you will need to collate all of those usage metrics for a holistic picture. There also may be usage data you don’t have access to (e.g., if an author has uploaded the full text of their article to ResearchGate, Academia.edu, or a preprint server).

It’s also important to note that it’s not just about journal-level metrics — be sure to consider alternative author- and article-level metrics (or altmetrics) as well.

Article-level metrics give a way to measure the level of attention each of your articles is getting online, whether via citations, Twitter mentions, or references in mainstream media (among other data sources). Three altmetrics services to consider analyzing are Altmetric, Plum Analytics, and OurResearch (formerly ImpactStory). Publishers can include the scores of these services on their article-level pages in addition to other metrics.

There are many services you can use to take a deeper dive into article-level impact (some at a cost), like Kudos, Altmetric, Dimensions, Wizdom.ai, Google Scholar, PubMed, and CrossRef Cited-by.

Making the most of your opportunities

We have explored four key steps for you to work through and consider when assessing your journal, its content, and community impact. Each publisher is different and often has limited resources available, so it’s about what you can prioritize that is going to have the most positive impact for your journal, aligned with your strategic editorial objectives. Whether you have extended your journal scope and want to encourage quality submissions from new communities or you are looking to showcase the authors publishing in your journal, there is a wealth of information available to help you identify the best approaches.

Go beyond the JIF and consider how else you can track and demonstrate impact. Make sure you are empowering your community to promote their work and that you’re making the best use of the data available to drive your editorial strategy forward. And then review where you can adjust to be more competitive. It’s essential to seek advice from your service providers like Scholastica and member bodies you are part of to share and learn best practices.

Source: https://blog.scholasticahq.com/

JRTDD has been indexed in SCOPUS

Dear colleagues and friends,

With great pleasure I want to inform you that JRTDD has been indexed into the SCOPUS. It is a great achievement for the editorial office.

What is Scopus?

Scopus offers free features to non-subscribed users and is available through Scopus Preview. Researchers may use Scopus Preview to assist with their research, such as searching authors, and learning more about Scopus content coverage and source metrics.

Scopus is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature: scientific journals, books and conference proceedings. Delivering a comprehensive overview of the world’s research output in the fields of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and arts and humanities, Scopus features smart tools to track, analyze and visualize research.

Source: https://service.elsevier.com/


JRTDD Editor-in-chief

JRTDD has been indexed in Hinari

Dear readers,

I want to share newest information that our Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities has been indexed in Hinari. Hinari is part of World Health Organization (WHO).

About Hinari

Hinari Access to Research for Health Programme provides free or very low cost online access to the major journals in biomedical and related social sciences to local, not-for-profit institutions in developing countries.

Hinari was launched in January 2002, with some 1500 journals from 6 major publishers: Blackwell, Elsevier Science, the Harcourt Worldwide STM Group, Wolters Kluwer International Health & Science, Springer Verlag and John Wiley, following the principles in a Statement of Intent signed in July 2001. Since that time, the numbers of participating publishers and of journals and other full-text resources has grown continuously. Up to 150 publisher partners and 170 publishers’ content are offering up to 85,000 information resources in Hinari and many others are joining the programme.

Source: https://www.who.int/hinari/about/en/

JRTDD Editor-in-Chief

JRTDD have been indexed in CiteFactor

Dear readers,

I want to share good news that Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities have been indexed in CiteFactor.

What is CiteFactor?

The CiteFactor server provides indexing of major international journals and proceedings. Author can get information about international journal impact factor, proceedings (research papers) and information on upcoming events. All the journal pages have pointers to Web pages of the publishers which are integrated into the CiteFactor stream pages.

The purpose is to increase the visibility and ease of use of open access scientific and scholarly journals. If your journal is indexed & got validated stamp from Citefactor, you can request for the calculation of impact factor for your journal.

“In addition, CiteFactor is working on next major task to link publications with all the publications in their bibliographies, thereby making possible a wide variety of publication and citation reports.”

Directory of International Reseach Journals in association with leading universities.

Source: https://www.citefactor.org/

JRTDD Editor-in-chief

JRTDD indexed in UNSW Sydney Library

Dear readers,

JRTDD is reading everywhere on the globe. Now, it is indexed in UNSW Sydney Library. We are glad about that.

What is UNSW Sydney?

UNSW Sydney (the University of New South Wales), is one of Australia’s leading research and teaching universities. At UNSW, we take pride in the broad range and high quality of our teaching programs. Our teaching gains strength and currency from our research activities, strong industry links and our international nature; UNSW has strong regional and global engagement.

JRTDD Editor-in-chief

JRTDD indexed in Libris

Dear readers,

Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is already indexed in Libris.

What is Libris?

LIBRIS is a national search service providing information on titles held by Swedish university and research libraries, as well as about twenty public libraries. Here you can find books, periodicals, articles, maps, posters, printed music, electronic resources, etc.

The National Library of Sweden is responsible for the operation and development of this online search service.

JRTDD Editor-in-chief

IN MEMORIAM – Prof. Dr. Alexander Poletaev

Dear readers,

With great sadness we want to announce that yesterday on March 6th, 2021 Prof. Dr. Alexander Poletaev died in hospital in Moscow. He was the member of JRTDD Editorial Board. We send condolences to his family for this great person. Here we want to thanks Prof. Poletaev for his contribution as author and reviewer in Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities in almost last three years.

Prof. Dr. Alexander Poletaev was born in Moscow, Russia in 1951. He was a graduate of the 3rd Medical Institute in Moscow (1974), where he later obtained his PhD (1977). He obtained MD degrees in 1988 on the Faculty of Biochemistry of the University of International Friendship in Moscow. He worked as researcher, senior researcher, main researcher in the Res. Inst. of Normal Physiology by name P. K. Anokhin, Moscow; Medical Research Center Immmunculus, Moscow; Federal Research Ctr. of Reanimation and Rehabilitation RAS, Moscow, Russia. His research interests were related to Immunophysiology, Natural autoimmunity, Autism, Immunology of pregnancy and fetal development, Immunobiotechnology, Oncoimmunology. He was member of some International Scientific Society and member of Editorial Board of many international journals. He took a part (as invited speaker, Chairman and co-chairman) in nearly two dozen of International Congresses, conferences and seminars. He was an author of more than 200 articles published in Russian and international journals, handbooks and manuals. He was author more than 10 Patents in field of Biochemistry, Immunology, Biotechnology.

JRTDD indexed in Sherpa Romeo

Dear readers,

I want to inform you that JRTDD is already indexed in Sherpa Romeo.

About Sherpa Romeo

Sherpa Romeo is an online resource that aggregates and presents publisher and journal open access policies from around the world. Every registered publisher or journal held in Romeo is carefully reviewed and analyzed by our specialist team who provide summaries of self-archiving permissions and conditions of rights given to authors on a journal-by-journal basis where possible.

The policy information provided through this service primarily aims to serve the academic research community. Since the service launched over 15 years ago, publisher policies and the open access sector have changed a lot. Open access policy can be complex and varies according to geographical location, the institution, and the various routes to open access — all of which affects how and where you can publish your research.

Source:  https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/

Caregivers’ Perceptions of Family Quality of Life of Individuals with Developmental Disabilities Comorbid with Dementia: A Pilot Study

Preethy S. SAMUEL

Eastern Michigan University, School of Social Work
Department of Health Care Sciences, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Detroit, Michigan, USA
E-mail: ctopole1@emich.edu
Received: 17-October-2020
Revised: 16-November-2020
Accepted: 20-November-2020
Online first: 21-November-2020


Introduction: Although individuals with intellectual/ developmental disabilities (I/DD) are living longer than in the past, they also are exposed to age-related changes in health and well-being. They are prone to acquire dementia that often manifests earlier and more frequently than in the general population. However, there is sparse knowledge on the daily challenges that affect the quality of life of the individuals with I/DD and comorbid dementia and their family caregivers.

Aim: This pilot study examined strengths and challenges of individuals with dual diagnoses of I/DD and dementia using the family quality of life (FQOL) framework.

Method: Cross-sectional data was gathered from a convenience sample of family caregivers using a web-based electronic survey.

Objectives: This study aims to identify the common and differential elements of the DLD (SLI) and LD through a quantitative and qualitative analysis.

Results: The variables of interest in this study were the levels of importance and satisfaction attributed to the nine FQOL domains, and overall FQOL. The mean level of importance was higher than the associated ratings of satisfaction in eight of the nine domains, with an overall importance mean of 4.15 and satisfaction mean of 3.28. Analysis of the open-ended comments indicated that the negative impact of social isolation, compound caregiving, and dynamically changing caregiving needs on overall FQOL was balanced by participants’ values and beliefs.

Results: A statistical analysis (Student’s t test) was conducted in order to compare the children in LD and DLD groups. The data obtained from this analysis along with LSA indicate that the language skills differ between the two groups in the following aspects: lexical, pragmatic, semantic, syntactic, morphological and phonological. Significant differences (p < .05) occur for the start of speech therapy age, phonological disorder, passive vocabulary and language psychological age. Results for active vocabulary did not indicate a statistical difference between LD and DLD children.

Implication for practice: The discrepancies in the FQOL domains pertaining to formal and informal services and social supports elucidate a need to empower families with high caregiving needs through research, practice and policy.

Conclusion Providers should be cognizant of the needs of individuals with I/DD and dementia comorbid, as well as the needs of their family caregivers.

Key words: Aging families, Caregiving, Dementia, Developmental Disability, Family quality of life, Intellectual Disability

Citation: Marsack-Topolewski, N. C., Samuel, S. P. Caregivers’ Perceptions of Family Quality of Life of Individuals with Developmental Disabilities Comorbid with Dementia: A Pilot StudyJournal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 2020 Dec 25; 3(2): 56-70. https://doi.org/10.26407/2020jrtdd.1.38

Full Text Article