3 measurements spanning 6 days, net -2. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 834–836 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 09:03
834
-2
7 Aug 2026, 07:03
836
no change
6 Aug 2026, 23:18
836
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 9 August 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 8 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Reaction mix
71 reactions across 14 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 52.1% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
37
52.1%
👍
16
22.5%
😢
7
9.86%
👏
5
7.04%
👌
2
2.82%
😱
2
2.82%
😁
1
1.41%
🤔
1
1.41%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 14 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 71reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 9 August 2025 to 8 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
↩ مشکل پایگاههای علمی با ایندکس ژورنال های ایرانی!
رشد و ارتقای ژورنالهای علمی، بهویژه ژورنالهای داخلی، در شرایط کنونی نیازمند توجهی فراتر از روالهای معمول است. در فضایی که برخی پایگاههای استنادی و نمایهسازی بینالمللی گاه با حساسیتها و رویکردهای نابرابر نسبت به نشریات کشورهای مختلف عمل میکنند، دانشگاهها و مراکز علمی باید با دقت و حساسیت بیشتری در مسیر توسعه و تثبیت جایگاه نشریات خود گام بردارند.
از جمله اق…
کارخانهی چکیدهها—فرهنگ پژوهشی آسیبزننده به آموزش پزشکی
در این مقاله که در شماره ۱۸ دسامبر ۲۰۲۵ مجله JAMA منتشر شده،
نویسندگان از روند نگرانکنندهای در آموزش پزشکی انتقاد میکنند: تمرکز بیش از حد بر تعداد چکیدههای پژوهشی (abstracts) به جای کیفیت واقعی پژوهشها برای پذیرشدر دستیاری.
🔍 نکات کلیدی مقاله
- تولید انبوه چکیدهها برای رزومه
دانشجویان و رزیدنتها تحت فشار هستند تا تعداد زیادی چکیده تولید کنند، حت…
به مناسبت ۲۵ دسامبر زادروز اسحاق نیوتون
نیوتون در شاهکار عظیم خود
Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica
از سه نفر از جمله هوک و هایلی یاد میکند که قانون عکس مجذور فاصله را برای جاذبه اجسام، قبل از نیوتون، بیان کردهاند.
حتی دانشمندی مانند نیوتون در چند قرن قبل قوانین اخلاق نشر را رعایت میکرده است
#اخلاق_نشر
#سرقت_علمی
در کانال اخلاق نشر و منابع علمی در تلگرام عضو شوید
http://t.me/pubethicsmums/1494
به مناسبت هفته پژوهش و فن آوری
آیا اکثر مقالات چاپ شده نتایج اشتباه دارند؟
فیلم به اشتراک گذاشته شده، مشکلاتی را که باعث میشوند درصد قابل توجهی از مطالعات چاپ شده نتایج اشتباه داشته باشند را معرفی میکند.
۱- عدم انتشار نتایج منفی
۲- توان کم و حجم نمونه ناکافی
۳- سوگیری پژوهشگران
۴- کاهش p-value با استفاده از روشهای مختلف(p hacking) که حتی در علم فیزیک هم اتفاق میفتد!
۵- هدف پژوهشگران فقط چاپ مقاله است نه انجام درست پ…
چرا فرضیه باید پشتوانه علمی داشته باشد؟
فریبا اصغری
در پژوهش، انتخاب فرضیه پژوهش باید بر پایه شواهد قبلی، منطق علمی یا سازوکارهای پذیرفتهشده انجام شود. اگر پژوهشگر بدون پشتوانه علمی تعداد زیادی فرضیه را همزمان آزمایش کند، احتمال یافتن نتایج «معنادار» کاملاً تصادفی بهطور چشمگیری افزایش مییابد. این مسئله باعث میشود حتی نتایج ظاهراً مثبت نیز قابلاعتماد نباشند.
اگر فرض کنیم تمام پژوهشگران مقالاتشان را درست اجرا …
تأملی آموزشی بر یک مقاله درباره PubPeer: نقدی بر یک نقد
متن پیوست نقدی بر مقالهای است که با رویکردی انتقادی به پلتفرم PubPeer پرداخته اما خود از منظر اخلاق نشر، استدلال و شواهد تجربی با کاستیهای جدی روبهروست.
مقاله مورد نقد، مدعاهایی کلی درباره «سلاحسازی نقد» و «شکگرایی افراطی» به PubPeer منتسب کرده، بیآنکه شواهد کمی یا مطالعات پشتیبان ارائه دهد. از دیگر اشکالات جدی مقاله، استناد مدعیات مقاله به منابع جعلی و…
هفته درستکاری در انتشارات
کمیته اخلاق انتشارات COPE وبینارهایی به مناسبت این هفته از امروز تا جمعه برگزار میکند. برای اطلاع و ثبت نام میتوانید به لینک زیر مراجعه کنید:
https://publicationethics.org/events/publication-integrity-week-2025
توجه به مقالات رترکت شده و تقویت سلامت پژوهش
کلاریویت اعلام کرده از امسال در گزارش IF مجلات همه ارجاعات «به» و «از» مقالات رترکت شده دیگر در صورت کسر ضریب تأثیر (JIF) شمرده نمیشوند؛ اما خود مقالات بازپسگرفتهشده همچنان در مخرج (تعداد مقالهها) باقی میمانند تا شفافیت حفظ شود. هدف، کاهش هرگونه اعوجاج در سنجهها و تقویت اعتماد به JIF است.
در نسخه ۲۰۲۴ JCR از میان ۴٫۶ میلیون ارجاعی که وارد محاسبه JIF شدند، تنها حدو…
کلام آخر
🎙 گوینده: دکتر شیرانی
🎬 تدوین: میثم فلاحپور
🎧 اسپاتیفای | اپل پادکست | شنوتو | کست باکس
💢 این مجموعه با حمایت معاونت تحقیقات و فناوری دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران ساخته میشود. 🎓
📧 Email us: Helsincast@gmail.com
🆔 HelsinCast on: Telegram | Instagram
Shares as published, totalling 99%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @HelsinCast. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Polls
The 6 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
به کاربردی و قابل فهم بودن اپیزود ۲۲ چه امتیازی می دهید؟
بسیار زیاد67%
زیاد0%
متوسط22%
کم11%
بسیار کم0%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 9 August 2025 to 8 July 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 335,113 of 1,169,250entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 13 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“HelsinCast | هلسینکست” (@HelsinCast), 834 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/HelsinCast.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.