ScienceGuardians identifies anonymous intimidation & coordinated campaigns
Secure Environment: Verified contributors only, ensuring meaningful and responsible discussions. Members can stay anonymous while verified, ensuring legitimacy and accountability.
Combatting Misconduct: A fortress against anonymous intimidation and coordinated campaigns, fostering evidence-based dialogue and protecting the academic community.
Resources and Training: Access classified content, participate in enlightening debates, and stay at the forefront of ethical practices.
Hack-Proof Platform: Your privacy is paramount. The identity information of users choosing to remain anonymous is securely stored offline.
Our Commitment:
Integrity and Accountability: Every account verified for credible and responsible engagement.
Inclusivity and Fairness: A platform where all voices in the scientific community are respected.
Support and Collaboration: Helping resolve issues delicately and constructively.
Participant
Why does the text report both 359 and 527 as the initial total? Which one is correct, and how did the discrepancy arise?
Can you provide the exact output counts from Scopus and WoS before any filtering to verify the numbers?
This error suggests possible mishandling of the PRISMA protocol. How can readers trust the reproducibility of the dataset when the initial search results are inconsistently reported?