“On 31 January 2020, Wellcome published a statement calling on researchers, journals and funders to ‘share interim and final research data relating to the outbreak… as rapidly and widely as possible’.
This statement has now been signed by more than 150 organisations including publishers, scientific institutions and preprint repositories.
Signing a statement is one thing, acting on it something else. Has the research community done enough to share their data openly and transparently? And will these commitments lead to a collaborative and transparent research culture? …”
“Wellcome has updated its guidance for researchers to help them comply with our open access policy and support them when some journals have discouraged them from making their Author Accepted Manuscripts open access….
‘We are disappointed that some publishers are implementing processes that seek to discourage our researchers from exercising their right to make their Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) open access. We urge these publishers to stop these practices and instead focus their efforts on developing Plan S-aligned publishing options.
‘Where publishers embrace this transition, we will fund fair and reasonable publishing costs. Moreover, under this model, the Version of Record will be made open access, and as such the author will not need to make use of their right to share the AAM.
‘In the meantime, when faced with an obligation to agree pay an Article Processing Charge (which we will not fund) we encourage our researchers to either contact the journal to request a waiver to this fee, or to consider submitting their manuscript to a different journal. …”
“We are looking for an enthusiastic and engaging colleague to lead the implementation of a project to embed the principles of the Declaration on Research Assessment in the university’s practice. An implementation plan is in place, and you will be involved in designing and delivering relevant training, liaising closely with academic faculties (both academic and professional services colleagues), and establishing systems to monitor the progress of the responsible metrics policy’s rollout. Based in the Library’s Open Research team, you will be comfortable engaging with academic and professional services colleagues at all levels in the university structure.”
“In 2020 the Wellcome Open Research (WOR) publishing platform reached a significant milestone when it became the single most used venue for Wellcome-funded researchers to share their research findings.
In this blog post, Robert Kiley, Head of Open Research, Wellcome, and Michael Markie, Publishing Director, F1000, provide an analysis of publishing activity on the WOR platform and preview some of the initiatives we have planned for 2021….
Speed of publication remains one of the platform’s unique selling points. Table 3, below, shows that most articles are published within 26 days of being submitted and receive the first peer review report some 21 days later. Once an article has received two “approved” statuses from reviewers (or one “approved” and two “approved with reservation” statuses) articles are submitted for indexing in PubMed, Scopus and other bibliographic databases….”
“Transformative Arrangements are strategies which encourage subscription publishers to transition to full and immediate Open Access and where fees are charged for providing publishing services rather than subscription fees for reading.
These approaches include Transformative Agreements and Transformative Journals as well as other open access publishing initiatives.
This document provides guidance for organisations in receipt of open access block grant funding when using Wellcome funds to support Transformative Arrangements for the period January 2021 – December 2024. This Guidance will be kept under review and may be updated from time to time….
By definition, TAs are transitional in nature….
Transformative Journals (TJ) are subscription/hybrid journals that are committed to transitioning to fully OA journals. Transformative Journals must gradually increase the share of Open Access content and offset subscription income from payments for publishing services thereby avoiding double payments….
“Our OA policy for journal articles is in line with the key principles of Plan S
(opens in a new tab. Wellcome is a member of cOAlition S(opens in a new tab) and is committed to working in partnership with other funders to make all research articles OA.
Our policy for monographs and book chapters remains unchanged….
We updated our grant conditions in January 2021 to include:
a new condition that all grantholders – both new and current – will automatically grant a CC BY public copyright licence to all their future Author Accepted Manuscripts. This will apply to manuscripts that are:
reporting original research
supported in whole, or in part, by Wellcome grant funding.
an update to the existing condition whereby grantholders must also include the following statement on all submissions of original research to peer-reviewed journals: …”
“Ripeta and Wellcome are pleased to announce a collaborative effort to assess data and code availability in the manuscripts of funded research projects.
The project will analyze papers funded by Wellcome from the year prior to it establishing a dedicated Open Research team (2016) and from the most recent calendar year (2019). It supports Wellcome’s commitment to maximising the availability and re-use of results from its funded research.
Ripeta, a Digital Science portfolio company, aims to make better science easier by identifying and highlighting the important parts of research that should be transparently presented in a manuscript and other materials.
The collaboration will leverage Ripeta’s natural language processing (NLP) technology, which scans articles for reproducibility criteria. For both data availability and code availability, the NLP will produce a binary yes-no response for the presence of availability statements. Those with a “yes” response will then be categorized by the way that data or code are shared….”
“Our open access policy 2021 requires Wellcome-funded organisations to publicly commit to:
assessing research outputs and other research contributions based on their intrinsic merit
discouraging the inappropriate use of proxies or metrics – such as the title or impact factor of the journal in which the work was published.
We believe that research assessment processes used by research organisations and funders in making recruitment, promotion and funding decisions should embody two core principles (‘the principles’) as set out in the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)(opens in a new tab):
be explicit about the criteria used to evaluate scientific productivity, and clearly highlight that the scientific content of a paper is more important than publication metrics or the identity of the journal in which it is published
recognise the value of all relevant research outputs (for example publications, datasets and software), as well as other types of contributions, such as training early-career researchers and influencing policy and practice…..”
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers and publishers have pulled together to publish their outputs at an unprecedented rate. So, how have they responded? And how will this change research culture and the way findings are disseminated in future? …
Subscription publishers have stepped up to respond to this global emergency by removing paywalls and allowing content to be reused. But this has also shone a spotlight on the shortcomings of the traditional scholarly publishing system, which is not fit for purpose in the 21st century.
A business model in which 75% of the research literature is only accessible to paying subscribers(opens in a new tab) is unacceptable, especially as much of that research has been funded by the public purse….”
“DORA launched a new virtual discussion series for public and private research funders on Wednesday, March 26. The goal of the series is to increase communication about research assessment reform by providing a space for funders to share and discuss new initiatives. We hope this will ultimately serve as a platform to accelerate the spread of good research assessment policies and practices.
Representatives from the Swiss National Science Foundation, Dutch Research Council, and Wellcome Trust provided updates on some of their pilot projects….”
“We call on researchers, journals and funders to ensure that research findings and data relevant to this outbreak are shared rapidly and openly to inform the public health response and help save lives.
We affirm the commitment to the principles set out in the 2016 Statement on data sharing in public health emergencies, and will seek to ensure that the World Health Organization (WHO) has rapid access to emerging findings that could aid the global response….
Specifically, we commit to work together to help ensure:
all peer-reviewed research publications relevant to the outbreak are made immediately open access, or freely available at least for the duration of the outbreak
research findings relevant to the outbreak are shared immediately with the WHO upon journal submission, by the journal and with author knowledge
research findings are made available via preprint servers before journal publication, or via platforms that make papers openly accessible before peer review, with clear statements regarding the availability of underlying data
researchers share interim and final research data relating to the outbreak, together with protocols and standards used to collect the data, as rapidly and widely as possible – including with public health and research communities and the WHO
authors are clear that data or preprints shared ahead of submission will not pre-empt its publication in these journals….”
“The public call for rapid sharing of research data relevant to the COVID-19 outbreak (see go.nature.com/2t1lyp6) is driving an unprecedented surge in (unrefereed) preprints. To help pinpoint the most important research, we have launched Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview, with support from the London-based charity Wellcome. This is an open-source platform for rapid review of preprints related to emerging outbreaks (see https://outbreaksci.prereview.org).
These reviews comprise responses to short, yes-or-no questions, with optional commenting. The questions are designed to capture structured, high-level input on the importance and quality of the research, which can be aggregated across several reviews. Scientists who have ORCID IDs can submit their reviews as they read the preprints (currently limited to the medRxiv, bioRxiv and arXiv repositories). The reviews are open and can be submitted anonymously….”
“Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview is a web application for open, rapid reviews of outbreak-related preprints.
On this platform you can:
Find rapid reviews of existing preprints;
Request reviews of preprints (your own, or preprints you are interested in);
This open project is funded by the Wellcome Trust as a collaboration between Outbreak Science and PREreview.
Outbreak Science is a non-profit organization aiming to advance the science of outbreak response. Outbreak Science supports early and open dissemination of data, code, and research.
PREreview is an open project fiscally sponsored by the non-profit organization Code for Science & Society. PREreview’s mission is to increase diversity in the scholarly peer review process by empowering all researchers to engage with preprint reviews….”
“Wellcome Trust and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) recently announced the launch of the “Learned Society Curation Awards,” a new funding initiative designed to reward societies who are looking beyond publishing when thinking of their future contributions.
What might this statement tell us about the vision these funders’ have for learned societies in an open future? …
The awards—up to £200,000 over three years—are for those who “want to explore new ways of signaling the significance of published research outputs in an open and transparent manner.”…
How often do substantial grants and awards become available to fund society experimentation? The Learned Society Curation Awards offer eligible societies the chance to fund pilot projects that may provide for new sources of revenue in the future. This should be welcome news for societies seeking to explore non-publication-based revenue and to diversify for improved financial sustainability.”