]u[ Ubiquity Press Responds to NIH Call for Information, as part of Fully OA Group
Reply
Category Archives: oa.nih
[SPARC response to the NIH public access plan]
“SPARC strongly supports the OSTP Memorandum’s emphasis on ensuring equity in contributing to, accessing, and benefitting from the results of federally funded research, and we appreciate NIH’s specific attention on how to ensure equity in publication opportunities for its funded investigators. As the research process has shifted to the digital environment, a wide variety of channels designed to support more rapid, frequent, and iterative communication of research findings have emerged. It is vital that researchers have compliance options that do not present them with financial barriers. To that end, NIH should make it clear that investigators can fully comply with its public access policy by depositing their author’s accepted manuscripts into PubMed Central (PMC) or any other agency-approved repository—and that there is no charge to do so. In its guidance, it is important for NIH to make clear that any fee that investigators may be asked to pay is a publication fee, and not a fee required by NIH to comply with its policy. It is critical that investigators do not conflate compliance with article processing charges (APCs), which create significant barriers for less-well-resourced investigators and institutions to make their research available….”
OASPA response to NIH RFI 2023 – OASPA
“This is OASPA’s response to the Request for Information based on this policy (with revisions) from the NIH as released on 21 Feb 2023.
OASPA (the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association) represents a diverse community of organizations engaged in open scholarship and encourages and enables open access as the predominant model for scholarly outputs.
OASPA wishes to ensure that open access is equitable and inclusive and is keen to explore with its publisher members and library stakeholders ways to increase equity in open access publishing. Why? Because the inclusion of all researchers, including authors from developing and transition countries, and indeed from all backgrounds and life stages, is essential for advancing human knowledge and also for a successful transition to open access. Without the development of new and more equitable approaches to open access, we will not benefit from its full potential….”
[COGR comments on the NIH public access plan]
“COGR is an association of over 200 public and private U.S. research universities and affiliated academic medical centers and research institutes. COGR concerns itself with the impact of federal regulations, policies, and practices on the performance of research conducted at our member institutions. As recipients of a significant portion of NIH extramural research programs, COGR’s member institutions value the opportunity to respond to this request. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memo1 sets forth requirements to increase access to publications and data resulting from federally funded research, and the NIH RFI NOT-OD-23-091 outlines NIH’s plans to address this directive. As recipients of federally funded research, ensuring public access to publications and research data resulting from supported research is core to our mission as research institutions and a responsibility we take seriously. COGR looks forward to continuing to engage with the community and the agencies on this important topic and offer the following comments….”
ARL Comments on NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to Results of NIH-Supported Research – Association of Research Libraries
“On February 21, 2023, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) released “Request for Information on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research.” The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is pleased to offer the following comments in response to this request….”
Data sharing in the context of community-engaged research partnerships – ScienceDirect
“Highlights
Data sharing policies should consider to whom benefits do and do not accrue.
Community Engaged Research Principles would increase community benefit.
Funders should develop mechanisms to ensure community benefit from data sharing.
Funders should track impact of data sharing on community-relevant outcomes….”
[Comments on the NIH public access plan]
“This response to the “NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research” request for public input is submitted on behalf of the Open Research Funders Group. The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is a partnership of 25 philanthropic organizations committed to the open sharing of research outputs. We believe openness is better for philanthropy, better for research, and better for society. Open research accelerates the pace of discovery, reduces information-sharing gaps, encourages innovation, and promotes reproducibility. Collectively, the ORFG members hold assets in excess of $250 billion, with total annual giving in the $12 billion range. Members’ interests range the entirety of the disciplinary spectrum, including life sciences, physical sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. This response has been prepared by Greg Tananbaum and Dr. Erin McKiernan, Director and Community Manager (respectively) of the ORFG, in conjunction with representatives of the ORFG membership.
The Open Research Funders Group applauds both the substance of the NIH’s draft plan and the added step of making it available for public comment. From a process perspective, the NIH’s approach reinforces the federal government’s stated desire to co-develop practical public access strategies in a transparent and inclusive manner. The plan itself identifies practical mechanisms for the timely sharing of scholarly publications and research data. The draft plan wisely builds upon the lessons learned by NIH through both their long-term stewardship of PubMed Central and their recent rollout of the 2023 Data Management and Sharing Policy. In this regard, the plan articulates clear, easy-to-follow guidance for grantees….”
[Comments on the NIH public access plan]
“This response to the “NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research” request for public input is submitted on behalf of the Open Research Funders Group. The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is a partnership of 25 philanthropic organizations committed to the open sharing of research outputs. We believe openness is better for philanthropy, better for research, and better for society. Open research accelerates the pace of discovery, reduces information-sharing gaps, encourages innovation, and promotes reproducibility. Collectively, the ORFG members hold assets in excess of $250 billion, with total annual giving in the $12 billion range. Members’ interests range the entirety of the disciplinary spectrum, including life sciences, physical sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. This response has been prepared by Greg Tananbaum and Dr. Erin McKiernan, Director and Community Manager (respectively) of the ORFG, in conjunction with representatives of the ORFG membership.
The Open Research Funders Group applauds both the substance of the NIH’s draft plan and the added step of making it available for public comment. From a process perspective, the NIH’s approach reinforces the federal government’s stated desire to co-develop practical public access strategies in a transparent and inclusive manner. The plan itself identifies practical mechanisms for the timely sharing of scholarly publications and research data. The draft plan wisely builds upon the lessons learned by NIH through both their long-term stewardship of PubMed Central and their recent rollout of the 2023 Data Management and Sharing Policy. In this regard, the plan articulates clear, easy-to-follow guidance for grantees….”
ORFG Responds to NIH Public Access Plan RFI — Open Research Funders Group
“The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is pleased to submit a response to the National Institutes of Health’s “Request for Information on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research”. As detailed in our formal submission, the ORFG believes the NIH’s draft plan effectively addresses the federal government’s stated desire to co-develop practical public access strategies in a transparent and inclusive manner. The plan itself identifies mechanisms for the timely sharing of scholarly publications and research data. The draft plan wisely builds upon the lessons learned by NIH through both their long-term stewardship of PubMed Central and their recent rollout of the 2023 Data Management and Sharing Policy.
In our feedback, the ORFG encourages the NIH to include clear guidance to grantees on open licensing requirements to codify and maximize reuse rights; persistent identifiers (PIDs) and metadata; and equitable routes to policy compliance via repository deposits and rights retention….”
ORFG Responds to NIH Public Access Plan RFI — Open Research Funders Group
“The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) is pleased to submit a response to the National Institutes of Health’s “Request for Information on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research”. As detailed in our formal submission, the ORFG believes the NIH’s draft plan effectively addresses the federal government’s stated desire to co-develop practical public access strategies in a transparent and inclusive manner. The plan itself identifies mechanisms for the timely sharing of scholarly publications and research data. The draft plan wisely builds upon the lessons learned by NIH through both their long-term stewardship of PubMed Central and their recent rollout of the 2023 Data Management and Sharing Policy.
In our feedback, the ORFG encourages the NIH to include clear guidance to grantees on open licensing requirements to codify and maximize reuse rights; persistent identifiers (PIDs) and metadata; and equitable routes to policy compliance via repository deposits and rights retention….”
NIH VideoCast – Listening Session on NIH Public Access Plan
A video of about one hour’s worth of public comments on the NIH plan, with opening and closing remarks from the NIH.
ASAPbio’s response to the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access – ASAPbio
“ASAPbio is a 501(c)(3) organization working to promote innovation and transparency in life sciences communication.
We are fully supportive of the 2022 OSTP directive to make all federally-funded research immediately accessible upon publication. Based on the public access plan the NIH has proposed in response to this memo, we appreciate the NIH’s desire to ensure equitable access to research for diverse stakeholders, and to ensure that this is provided at reasonable costs that do not exacerbate existing disparities. Furthermore, we support the need to ensure that research outputs are findable and discoverable through robust infrastructure and standards.
Many of these goals can be supported by moving toward a model where preprints are the primary form of sharing; this would also provide a strong foundation for aligning researchers’ incentives with the goals set out in the RFI. Many researchers now experience a disconnect between wanting to share work with the community and existing incentives for keeping data private. In a preprint-centric model, researchers would be recognized for sharing their work early and completely, which would also accelerate scientific discovery. Preprints also support rigor, reproducibility, and integrity by allowing broad engagement in public commenting and peer review. Given these benefits, we offer the following suggestions for using preprints to promote equitable, cost-effective, and discoverable publishing….”
ASAPbio’s NIH RFI information session and response workshop
“The US NIH has released a Request for Information (RFI) about its proposed public access policy (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-23-091.html).
This is an important opportunity for researchers and other community members to voice support for open access and open science. Responses, which can be written by anyone, are due April 24.
Join ASAPbio for an RFI information session and response workshop where we will share relevant background information and important talking points and provide a supportive environment for silent writing. You will also be able to ask questions about the RFI, solicit feedback, and get help submitting your response….”
Sample Partnering Agreement Template | Ombudsman
Sample template for a deliberative approach by team members to assess and plan for key issues — e.g., collaboration rationale and readiness, inter- and intra-team communication, investigators’ technologies & resources, conflict management, budget issues, publication — that influence both scientific and collaborative success.
Virtual Listening Session on the NIH Public Access Plan – Office of Science Policy
“NIH will host a virtual, public listening session to hear community feedback on the NIH Plan to Enhance Public Access to the Results of NIH-Supported Research (NIH Public Access Plan). The NIH Public Access Plan is currently available for public comment through a Request for Information that NIH issued in February 2023. Written RFI responses on the NIH Public Access Plan will continue to be accepted until April 24, 2023….”