“The pathogens research community has driven, and benefited from, Open Science. As a leader in the field, PLOS Pathogens strives to advance community-rooted adoption of practices that enable transparency, rapid communication, reproducibility, and trust in research, and help to transform research globally. A key vision of PLOS Pathogens is to facilitate widespread adoption of Open Science to accelerate and improve research that is rigorous and trustworthy and to ensure its meaningful impact on lives.”
Category Archives: oa.plos
Results of PLOS experiments to increase sharing and discovery of research data – The Official PLOS Blog
“For PLOS, increasing data-sharing rates—and especially increasing the amount of data shared in a repository—is a high priority.
Research data is a vital part of the scientific record, essential to both understanding and reproducing published research. And data repositories are the most effective and impactful way to share research data. Not only is deposited data safer and more discoverable, articles with data in a repository have a 25% higher citation rate on average.
With support from the Wellcome Trust, we’ve been experimenting with two solutions designed to increase awareness about data repositories and promote data repository use among both authors and readers. One solution didn’t achieve its expected outcome in the context we tested it (a “negative” result) while the other shows promise as a tool for increasing engagement with deposited data. The mixed outcomes are an example of why it’s so important to share all research results regardless of their outcome – whether “positive” or “negative” results. We hope that our experiences, what we’ve learned, and above all the data and results, can help the scholarly communications community to develop new and better solutions to meet the challenges we all face, and advance Open Science.
Read on for a quick summary of the studies we conducted. Or get the full details from our new preprint on Figshare, and explore the data for yourself….”
Incentivising best practice in research data sharing: Experiments to increase use of and engagement with data repositories
Abstract: Improving the uptake of repositories to share research data is an aim of many publishers, funders and infrastructure providers. Even at the publisher PLOS, which has a mandatory data sharing policy, repositories are still used less commonly than Supporting Information to share data. This preprint presents the results of two experiments that tested solutions that aimed to increase the use of repositories for data sharing as well as increase engagement with shared data. The experiments—integration of the Dryad repository into the manuscript submission system at PLOS Pathogens and implementing an Accessible Data icon to signal data shared in a repository on published articles across the PLOS journal portfolio—were designed to be interventions that required minimal extra effort for authors (researchers). We collected usage data on these solutions as well as survey (n=654 and n=4,898) and interview (n=12) data from submitting authors. The results show that author uptake of the integrated repository (used by ~2% of submissions) was lower than expected in part due to lack of awareness despite various communication methods being used. Integration of data repositories into the journal submission process, in the context in which we tested it, may not increase use of repositories without additional visibility, or policy incentives. Our survey results suggest the Accessible Data icon did have some effect on author behaviour, although not in the expected way, as it influenced repository choice for authors who had already planned to use a repository rather than influencing the choice of sharing method. Furthermore, the Accessible Data icon was successful in increasing engagement with shared data, as measured by an increase in average monthly views of datasets linked to a cohort of 543 published articles that displayed it from 2.5 to 3.0 (an increase of 20%) comparing 12-month periods either side of the introduction of the icon. The results of these two experiments provide valuable insights to publishers and other stakeholders about strategies for increasing the use of repositories for sharing research data.
Introducing Short Reports—A new platform for swiftly communicating research findings | PLOS Pathogens
“We are excited to share that we are expanding PLOS Pathogens’ offerings through the launch of a new manuscript type: Short Reports. This addition augments the spectrum of exceptional research we consider for publication.
Pathogens has long been esteemed for its rigorous long-form publications, presenting in-depth mechanisms alongside observations through our Research Articles. But, we recognize that impactful discoveries come in various sizes. The birth of Short Reports signifies our acknowledgment that sometimes exceptional content arrives in compact not-yet-fully understood form. Scientific findings vary—while some warrant patience until mechanistic intricacies are unraveled and verified by multiple experimental approaches, others are intrinsically groundbreaking, serving the scientific community best when shared in their nascent stages—even if the driving mechanism has not yet revealed itself—thus allowing for collective exploration. Furthermore, Short Reports find their niche by encapsulating succinct yet ingenious experiments. These studies might describe novel phenomena, reconcile erstwhile contradictory observations, untangle specific enigmas, or apply established techniques to furnish brief yet compelling responses to scientific queries.
We anticipate that Short Reports will provide a vital platform for researchers to swiftly communicate their findings.”
PLOS Biology at 20: Exploring possible futures | PLOS Biology
“Twenty years ago this month, PLOS Biology was launched, helping to catalyze a movement that has transformed publishing in the life sciences. In this issue, we explore how the community can continue innovating for positive change in the next decades….”
Measuring protocol sharing: are we on the right track? – The Official PLOS Blog
“For almost a year, Open Science Indicators have offered the ability to measure three Open Science practices: data sharing, code sharing, and preprint posting. Now, PLOS and DataSeer are adding a fourth indicator for protocol sharing. As we expand the tool’s capabilities, we invite your feedback on the approach we’ve taken in this preliminary data release….
We drafted a set of requirements built on our OSI measurement framework and consulted on them with stakeholders including tool providers, meta-researchers, and other methods experts. We then worked with DataSeer to operationalize the requirements. Our current approach detects links to or citations of outputs from an allowlist of publications and repositories known to focus on protocols. In keeping with our approach to measuring data and code sharing, we also detect relevant metadata from supplementary information where available. Please consult our methods documentation for more detail….
Our roadmap for further developing the protocols indicator includes adding detection of protocols on lab websites and other online locations. We plan to look more deeply at citations of published protocols, so that we can understand the extent to which authors are pointing to procedures actually used in their study as opposed to referencing protocols for some other reason. We also want to be able to assess how often researchers share their own protocols versus protocols created by others.
Just as importantly, we’d like to hear from you: are there publications or repositories missing from our allowlist? How should we address the limitations of an allowlist-based approach? And are there other ways of communicating detailed methods information that we should consider? We’d be grateful for your input by November 15; you can comment below or write to mlaflamme [at] plos.org to share your perspective.”
PLOS Biology at 20: Reflecting on the road we’ve traveled | PLOS Biology
“This month, as we celebrate 20 years since the launch of PLOS Biology, we asked 3 editors who have led the journal to discuss the idea behind its launch and how it evolved throughout their tenures. Hemai Parthasarathy, Managing Editor 2003–2007, Theodora Bloom, Chief Editor 2008–2014, and Emma Ganley, Chief Editor 2014–2019, share their experiences below….”
A new Open Science Indicators dataset is here! – The Official PLOS Blog
“This is the fourth quarterly update to Open Science Indicators since we introduced the dataset in December 2022. It covers January 1 2019 to June 30 2023 (four full years, plus the first half of 2023). Like the previous installments, this update measures data-generation and -sharing, code-generation and -sharing, and preprint posting. It also includes a preliminary version of our first new indicator: protocol sharing. Watch this space for more on how we developed the protocol sharing indicator in a future post….”
Open Access Doesn’t Need APCs: Alternative models continue to grow in 2023
Beyond article-based charges: working group established | Plan S
“cOAlition S, in partnership with Jisc and PLOS, are delighted to announce the establishment of a multi-stakeholder working group, tasked to identify business models and arrangements that enable equitable participation in knowledge-sharing.
Following an open call for applicants, we received over 60 high-quality applications. After a thorough review process, with a focus on ensuring that the group represents a diverse range of stakeholders who are committed to supporting a more equitable publishing business model, we are pleased to announce that the following organisations have been invited to join the group.”
Research Sharing Survey
“ABOUT THE SURVEY
The survey should take about 10 minutes.
Your participation in this survey is completely voluntary, and you are free to withdraw at any time until you submit the survey. Answers will never be associated with individual participants and the results will only be analyzed in aggregate. Any research findings and survey data that are publicly shared will be anonymized.
The survey will close on September 30, 2023, 11:59 pm Pacific Daylight Time.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact the PLOS Research Team (research@plos.org)….”
Public access to published science is under threat in the US | InPublishing
Eight science publishers have signed a letter to the House Appropriations subcommittee to raise the dangers of the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill’s draft language.
Frontiers says The US House Appropriations Committee has released its 2024 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. It proposes new spending of $58 billion and seeks to “rein in the Washington bureaucracy by right-sizing agencies and programs.”
A group of eight science publishers have signed a letter to the House Appropriations subcommittee to raise the dangers of the bill’s draft language. If enacted, it would block federally funded research from being freely available to American taxpayers without delay on publication.
Individual Americans would be prevented from seeing the full benefits of the more than $90 billion in scientific research they fund each year via taxes. Science for the few who can access it – as opposed to the many who pay for it – is inefficient as scientific or democratic governmental policy.
Extending Accessible Data to more articles, repositories, and outputs – The Official PLOS Blog
“In March 2022, with support from the Wellcome Trust, we launched an experimental “Accessible Data” feature designed to increase research data sharing and reuse. Having observed some interesting preliminary results, we’re extending – and extending the scope of – our “Accessible Data” experiment….
The Accessible Data icon rewards sharing data (and code) in a repository via a weblink. Best practice is sharing via a link-able persistent identifier, such as a DOI, but many PLOS articles link to data in other ways, such as via URLs or private links that are intended to be used for peer review only (a common problem for publishers). There is clearly work to do to improve consistency and practice of how data links are shared, but we decided to be inclusive in how we deploy the Accessible Data icon. It displays as long readers can access the data. We decided it was more important to help researchers as authors – who may be unaware of the nuances of DOIs and private links – and also help them as readers, by including imperfect but functional links to data in our articles.”
Moving away from APCs: a multi-stakeholder working group convened by cOAlition S, Jisc and PLOS – The Official PLOS Blog
“cOAlition S, in partnership with Jisc and PLOS, are seeking to establish a multi-stakeholder working group to identify business models and arrangements that enable equitable participation in knowledge-sharing. The aims of this working group and the eligibility criteria that interested parties must meet in order to apply are outlined below.
We anticipate that the group will consist of a maximum of twelve individuals and will represent the three key stakeholders – funders, institutions/library consortia and publishers – in roughly equal proportions.
Once established, the working group is expected to convene up to six times. The key outcome from this collaborative effort will be the development of a model (or multiple models) that, if implemented, would enable equitable participation in knowledge sharing….”
Moving away from APCs: a multi-stakeholder working group convened by cOAlition S, Jisc and PLOS | Plan S
“cOAlition S, in partnership with Jisc and PLOS, are seeking to establish a multi-stakeholder working group to identify business models and arrangements that enable equitable participation in knowledge-sharing. The aims of this working group and the eligibility criteria that interested parties must meet in order to apply are outlined below.
We anticipate that the group will consist of a maximum of twelve individuals and will represent the three key stakeholders – funders, institutions/library consortia and publishers – in roughly equal proportions.
Once established, the working group is expected to convene up to six times. The key outcome from this collaborative effort will be the development of a model (or multiple models) that, if implemented, would enable equitable participation in knowledge sharing.
Interested parties should apply using the form available at https://coalitions.typeform.com/MultiGroup….”