Category Archives: oa.portuguese

SciELO MarketPlace – commercialization platform for scholarly communication products and services | March 16, 2023

Posted on by
Reply

In 2023, the SciELO Program launches the SciELO MarketPlace as a platform to promote the supply and demand of scholarly communication products and services compatible with the methodologies and technologies of the SciELO Publication Model, being projected as an important advance for the scholarly communication infrastructure in the countries of the SciELO Network. …

SciELO MarketPlace is an evolution of SciELO’s policy and procedures to certify companies from Brazil and abroad that are qualified in the provision of products and services in line with SciELO’s methodologies and standards for the production of journals and articles with more than ten years of experience. These companies decisively contributed to the improvement of SciELO journals and to the national research communication infrastructure. From these experiences, SciELO MarketPlace is projected as a notable advance based on an online platform initially in Portuguese and in the future multilingual that will bring together the competitive offer of a growing number of scholarly communication products and services and the informed purchase by well-defined mechanisms of selection and evaluation.

The SciELO Program will implement SciELO MarketPlace by means of the Fundação de Apoio à Universidade Federal de São Paulo (FapUNIFESP), responsible for the administrative and legal management of the SciELO Brazil Collection, in partnership with Bradoo, a company specialized in customizing services based on ERP Odoo, which is an Integrated Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) that will provide reliability, maintenance and updating of its functionalities.

The MarketPlace is primarily intended to serve the research communication of the SciELO Network, but it will be accessible and publicly available to any user….”

Open Science: Emergency Response or the New Normal? | Acta Médica Portuguesa

Posted on by
Reply

From Google’s English:  “To align with open science, the assessment of research and researchers has to be broader, valuing all contributions and results (and not just publications), and adopting an essentially qualitative perspective, based on the review by peers, with limited and responsible use of quantitative indicators. There has also been slow progress in this domain, but it is hoped that the recently presented Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment and the Coali-tion for Advancing Research Assessment10 will speed up and give greater breadth to the transformation of the assessment process. If the three conditions mentioned above are met in the coming years, open science will no longer be just the science of emergencies. And open and collaborative research practices, with rapid dissemination of results, could become dominant, being considered the correct way of doing science, without the need to designate them as open science.”

Preprints em CSP

Posted on by
Reply

From Google’s English:  “CSP [Cad Saúde Pública] is a journal that guarantees public and free access to its entire collection for the reading public, an essential part of the principles of Open Science. In addition, CSP recognizes the importance of preprints in today’s scientific publishing scenario and, since 2020, accepts articles previously deposited in non-commercial preprint repositories (eg: arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, Zenodo and SciELO Preprints), before submission to the journal or during the peer review process.

 

In these two situations, it is necessary for the author to notify the journal’s editorial team and inform the name of the preprints server and the DOI assigned to the article.two?? However, the practice of publishing preprints of an article already approved in CSP on a server is not recommended. In this case, the participation of the scientific community debating with the author will not contribute to the improvement of the article and the duplicate DOI can harm the authors and the journal….

It is emphasized that the deposit of the article in the preprints server is a decision of the author. It is worth noting, however, the implications for the double-blind peer review system adopted by CSP, since it makes it possible to identify authorship.”

Sociolinguistic repositories as asset: challenges and difficulties in Brazil | Emerald Insight

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Purpose

This paper aims to provide a context for Brazilian Portuguese language documentation and its data collection to establish linguistic repositories from a sociolinguistic overview.

Design/methodology/approach

The main sociolinguistic projects that have generated collections of Brazilian Portuguese language data are presented.

Findings

The comparison with another situation of repositories (seed vaults) and with the accounting concept of assets is evocated to map the challenges to be overcome in proposing a standardized and professional language repository to host the collections of linguistic data arising from the reported projects and others, in the accordance with the principles of the open science movement.

Originality/value

Thinking about the sustainability of projects to build linguistic documentation repositories, partnerships with the information technology area, or even with private companies, could minimize problems of obsolescence and safeguarding of data, by promoting the circulation and automation of analysis through natural language processing algorithms. These planning actions may help to promote the longevity of the linguistic documentation repositories of Brazilian sociolinguistic research.

Sciety welcomes ASAPbio–SciELO Preprints crowd review for the evaluation of Brazilian-Portuguese preprints | For the press | eLife

Posted on by
Reply

Sciety is pleased to announce the first non-English group to bring open review and curation to the platform: ASAPbio–SciELO Preprints crowd review. Based in Brazil, the group reviews preprints relating to infectious disease research that are posted on the SciELO Preprints server in Brazilian Portuguese.

Breve cronologia da Ciência Aberta no Brasil – Vida acadêmica – modo de usar

Posted on by
Reply

From Google’s English:  “This brief chronology will map the history of discussions and initiatives on Open Science in Brazil (and some highly relevant international initiatives that put pressure on Brazilian actors, such as the UNESCO resolution). Until 2020 it includes academic works (such as articles, editorials and theses and dissertations – especially those related to the so-called Applied Human and Social Sciences), but even in these cases it will not contain all the production on the subject in the period . Thus, this survey is not intended to be a definitive ‘guide’ on the subject, but to present a glimpse into how the movement has unfolded, with special emphasis on the impacts on the publishing system and on doing science….”

SciELO – Brazil – Divulgação científica imuniza contra desinformação Divulgação científica imuniza contra desinformação

Posted on by
Reply

From Google’s English:  “Scientific knowledge gained a relevant audience in the pandemic because lies about Covid-19 threaten the lives of the population. It has been a long time since humanity faced such a high mortality disease globally. The pandemic required scientific journals to ensure the rapid publication of available evidence, ensuring the quality of information and the identification of biases that could compromise ittwo, since these works are the essential raw material to fight fake news , misinformation and conspiracy theories, which undermine the population’s adherence to the measures necessary to fight the pandemic….

in an infodemic1, naturally, fanciful, incredible news, which appeals to emotions and seems more phenomenal than reality itself, gains repercussions. The scientific dissemination of Covid-19 became an objective response by scientists to the denial movement3, which calls into question the effectiveness of vaccines, sabotages prevention measures and propagates miracle cures….”

SciELO – Brazil – Desafios para a sustentabilidade dos periódicos científicos brasileiros e do Programa SciELO Desafios para a sustentabilidade dos periódicos científicos brasileiros e do Programa SciELO

Posted on by
Reply

v

NOVA FCSH celebra Mês da Ciência Aberta 2021 em outubro

Posted on by
Reply

Google translate: “Open Science Month takes place in October, an initiative promoted by the NOVA FCSH’s Open Science Working Group, with several debates, workshops, webinars and dissemination initiatives. This initiative is part of the global celebration of the International Open Access Week, organized annually by SPARC. This year, the International Open Access Week (25 to 31 October) has the theme “It matters how we open up knowledge: Building structural equity”, and the NOVA FCSH Working Group will launch during this month the campaign “Open Science for All”. …

The Open Science Month at NOVA FCSH consists of sessions that will always be held online, mainly through the ZOOM platform. The complete program can be found below, as well as the links for registration in the respective sessions:

Webinar “Editorial quality and visibility of the magazines: the Latindex experience October 11, 2pm-3pm, Colibri Platform / ZOOM…”

SciELO Preprints em operação | SciELO em Perspectiva

Posted on by

From Google’s English:  “The SciELO Program starts the operation of the SciELO Preprints server – https://preprints.scielo.org – in order to speed up the availability of research articles and other scientific communications before or in parallel with their evaluation and validation by scientific journals. Although open to all thematic areas, SciELO Preprints will immediately serve especially for communications related to COVID-19….”

SciELO Preprints em operação | SciELO em Perspectiva

Posted on by

From Google’s English:  “The SciELO Program starts the operation of the SciELO Preprints server – https://preprints.scielo.org – in order to speed up the availability of research articles and other scientific communications before or in parallel with their evaluation and validation by scientific journals. Although open to all thematic areas, SciELO Preprints will immediately serve especially for communications related to COVID-19….”

Most of the no-fee OA journals listed in the DOAJ are published in languages other than English

Posted on by

“Leo Waaijers has dug some interest facts out of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and allowed me to post the results.

From Leo: The 7240 journals in the no-fee category in DOAJ has 1911 journals with Spanish full text, 1366 with Portuguese, 753 with French, and 692 with Indonesian. In percentages: 26, 19, 10, and 10. In the 2998 journal of the fee-based category these figures were respectively: 81, 76, 23, and 212; and in percentages: 3, 3, 1, and 7….”

Mais de 400 ferramentas de gestão de pesquisa disponíveis para os pesquisadores – edição 2017 – SIBiUSP – Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas da Universidade de São Paulo.

Posted on by

From Google’s English: “In a continuing effort to chart the changing landscape of academic and scientific communication, scientists from the University of Utrecht , the Netherlands, conducted a survey among researchers [1] in 2015, focusing on the use of research management tools. In the edition of 2 015, 101 research tools / sites  – only those that represented an innovation – were selected based on the questionnaire applied to more than 20 thousand researchers from about 100 organizations (universities and publishers). Since then, the results have been presented at various conferences and webinars….Read, view, annotate  and manage references – Acrobat Reader , HTML view, MS Word ,  Mendeley, ReadCube , iAnnotate , Hypothes.is , Papers , Annotated Books Online,  HistoryPin , PeerLibrary , TagTeam ,  Google Scholar Library , Zotero , EndNote Web , CiteUlike , Proquest Flow ,  RefBank , Stackly , Reference Manager ,  RefWorks , etc. …”

FASTR to be Considered by Senate Committee | SPARC

Posted on by

“After a month of intense conversations and negotiations, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) will bring the ‘Fair Access to Science and Technology Research (FASTR) Act’ up for mark-up on Wednesday, July 29th. The language that will be considered is an amended version of FASTR, officially known as the ‘Johnson-Carper Substitute Amendment,’  which was officially filed by the HSGAC leadership late on Friday afternoon, per committee rules. There are two major changes from the original bill language to be particularly aware of. Specifically, the amendment Replaces the six month embargo period with ‘no later than 12 months, but preferably sooner’ as anticipated; and Provides a mechanism for stakeholders to petition federal agencies to ‘adjust’ the embargo period if the12 months does not serve ‘the public, industries, and the scientific community.’ We understand that these modifications were made in order accomplish a number of things: Satisfy the requirement of a number of Members of HSGAC that the language more closely track that of the OSTP Directive; Meet the preference of the major U.S. higher education associations for a maximum 12 month embargo; Ensure that, for the first time, a number of scientific societies will drop their opposition for the bill; and  Ensure that any petition process an agency may enable is focused on serving the interests of the public and the scientific community …”