Strengthening Research through Data Sharing
Strengthening Research through Data Sharing
Data sharing holds incredible promise for strengthening the practice of medical research and the integrity of our clinical trial system.
Data sharing holds incredible promise for strengthening the practice of medical research and the integrity of our clinical trial system.
Senator Elizabeth Warren called on researchers to make public data they collect while testing drugs and medical devices on patients. Others disagree.
Harvard Library publishes report on converting subscription journals to open access.
How much German universities and research organisations spent on open access publication fees.
The tricks and teases academics use to entice their readers: clichés, the Bard and the phrases of the moment.
A new study from the University of California system confirms much of what we already knew about open access, particularly the increased financial burden it places on productive universities.
Authorea, a new collaborative tool, could revolutionize scientific authorship
An editorial argues that data sharing can cripple scientific progress and harm patients, but there are myriad flaws with that reasoning.
American Chemical Society announces intention to establish “ChemRxiv” preprint server to promote early research sharing
Advancements in the research integrity project launched in 2011.
The OpenTrialsFDA team was selected as a finalist for the Open Science Prize.
American Chemical Society to lead effort to match other disciplines
Chancellor Philip Hammond guarantees EU funding beyond date UK leaves the EU. British businesses and universities will have certainty over future funding and should continue to bid for competitive EU funds while the UK remains a member of the EU.
Encourage girls to explore scientific career paths.
We present a deeper view of our 2015 financials, covering publishing and non-publishing expenses. As part of our ambition to change how science publishing works, especially among highly selective journals, we hope that being transparent about our costs will help to set a future course for research communication that is efficient and sustainable.
Utilizing 250,000 papers from ArXiv.org we construct large coauthorship networks to investigate how individual network positions influence scientific success. Surprisingly, inter(sub)disciplinary collaborations decrease the probability of getting a paper published in specialized journals for almost all positions.
It is clear that the journal impact factor is not effective in predicting future citations of successful authors.
Nobel prize winning ideas are not always accepted by the community. By definition, they are paradigm shifting, revolutionary.
Currently, there is no record of previous submission of a paper to other journals and the comments it might have received in the journey to the final publication. A paper that might have been rejected by three or four journals goes into press, and people hear about the results without any of the background scientific debate and conversation that led to this publicatio.
Not just a competition but a resource that will continue to be useful now and in the future as we tackle improving reproducibility in the sciences.
Open source now runs the world. But it still faces problems
Through highlighting six recent advances in research infrastructure, this whitepaper seeks to recast how we think about metadata - not as a series of static records, but as objects that move between systems and organizations.
Sanjay Srivastava’s assessment of the state of psychology mixes a certain four-letter word and gallows humor with a desire to raise awareness of important research issues in his field.
There needs to be a transparent and openly recorded submission and review process.
A figshare case study of Micah Vandegrift's Digital Humanities research.
New 2016 Top 500 world university rankings conducted by CWCU of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Academic Ranking of World Universities).
A spirit of collective enterprise in scientific research is being replaced by a rush to assign precise credit for who did what.
Nonscientists should take part in discussions about research priorities and more.
Without open data, a scientific paper is little more than a statement that, in the author’s opinion, some evidence supports a certain set of claims.