From FAIR Leading Practices to FAIR Implementation and Back: An Inclusive Approach to FAIR at Leiden University Libraries
Paper describe how LU builds up its support for FAIR data before, during and after research through its involvement in leading practices, training and consultancy and end with recommendations for other universities wanting to implement the FAIR principles.
Recommendations for a National Open Science Strategy in Austria
A look at international activities on Open Science reveals a broad spectrum from individual institutional policies to national action plans. The present Recommendations for a National Open Science Strategy in Austria are based on these international initiatives and present practical considerations for their coordinated implementation with regard to strategic developments in research, technology and innovation (RTI) in Austria until 2030. The recommendation paper was developed from 2018 to 2020 by the OANA working group "Open Science Strategy" and published for the first time in spring 2020 for a public consultation. The now available final version of the recommendation document, which contains feedback and comments from the consultation, is intended to provide an impetus for further discussion and implementation of Open Science in Austria and serves as a contribution and basis for a potential national Open Science Strategy in Austria. The document builds on the diverse expertise of the authors (academia, administration, library and archive, information technology, science policy, funding system, etc.) and reflects their personal experiences and opinions.
In academia, decisions on promotions are influenced by the citation impact of the works published by the candidates. The authors examine whether the journal impact factor rank could be replaced with the relative citation ratio, an article-level measure of citation impact developed by the National Institutes of Health.
As the rush intensifies to find ways to treat and manage COVID-19, one thing is clear: researchers, along with their counterparts in industry and the health services, need unrestricted access to the research literature.
Helping to Archive and Preserve Open Access Journals
A recent study looked at the number of journals that had "vanished" from the internet. The study is a timely reminder of how vulnerable publishing outputs are. There is an urgent need for a group of organisations to come together to find a solution and minimise this risk.
The Contagion Externality of a Superspreading Event:The Sturgis Motorcycle Rally and COVID-19
Large in-person gatherings without social distancing and with individuals who have traveled outside the local area are classified as the “highest risk” for COVID-19 spread by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Between August 7 and August 16, 2020, nearly 500,000 motorcycle enthusiasts converged on Sturgis, South Dakota for its annual motorcycle rally.
Understanding Conceptual Impact of Scientific Knowledge on Policy
The Manchester Team within the Oslo Institute for Research on the Impact of Science centre has published this a conceptual paper that underpins the empirical work on framework conditions on the user side combining various political science and sociological theories.
Gender and Other Potential Biases in Peer Review: Cross-sectional Analysis of 38 250 External Peer Review Reports
The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) set out to examine whether the gender of applicants and peer reviewers and other factors influence peer review of grant proposals submitted to a national funding agency.
Drivers of Article Processing Charges in Open Access
This study sheds light on the various determinants of Articel Processing Charges in Open Access. The results strongly support the hypothesis that academia runs the risk not to take advantage of the cost-reducing opportunities inherent to digitization via a hybrid oa-strategy.
Their use and platforms require greater scrutiny Preprints-manuscripts that have not undergone peer review-were first embraced in physics, catalysed by the creation in the early 1990s of arXiv.org, an open online repository for scholarly papers.1 It was not until 2013 that similar initiatives were embraced by the biological and then medical sciences,2 and novel publishing platforms continue to emerge. Some commentators believe the potential for harm is outweighed by the benefits,134 but others have raised specific concerns regarding medical preprints and mitigating the risk of harm to the public.2 These discussions need to be revisited in the context of the covid-19 pandemic, which has been accompanied by an explosion of preprint publications. An analysis focusing on studies estimating the R of SARS-CoV-2 drew attention to the powerful role of preprints in shaping global discourse about covid-19 transmissibility. While showing the benefits that preprints may confer when adopting a consensus based approach-where data is extracted from multiple studies to observe trends and obtain an average with or without the exclusion of outliers-the authors also identify risks-matters of credibility and misinformation, both intentional and unintentional5-which may be increased where there are vested interests involved. Notably, two linked preprint publications examining the association between smoking and covid-19,67 which were widely disseminated before …