U.S. Library Outreach Workshop · Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM)

“As a community-led organization, the Open Book Collective regularly solicits advice and counsel for its development from the communities it seeks to serve. As university librarians are critical to the financial and other forms of support for open access and open source initiatives (such as publishers and infrastructure providers), they have been involved from the beginning of the OBC, from initial brainstorming to the processes of forming the collective — its values and principles, membership, governance, business model, web platform, and so on. Now that we are nearing the launch of the OBC, we are conducting a new series of workshops with librarians in order to get some further assessments from them regarding what we have built. It should be noted, first, that not only will the OBC always be seeking guidance from libraries as it launches and moves forward, but that librarians will have a major role to play in the governance of the collective as well, meaning, librarians are not just our consultants; they are building the collective with us….

On May 4, 2022, OBC representatives met with librarians from UK university libraries, and the outcomes are summarized in our blog post, UK Libraries Outreach Workshop. More recently, on June 3, 2022, OBC representatives met with librarians from research university libraries across the US. Some of these librarians participated in the early workshops led by members of the COPIM project (Community-led Open Publishing Infrastructures for Monographs) in 2020 and others were learning about the OBC for the first time. The variety of perspectives we gained in the US-focused workshop has helped us to reflect in meaningful and practical ways about the further development of the OBC, and we summarize below some of the highlights of this recent discussion….” 

Ask the Community: What Did SSP 2022 Mean to You?

In the last of this series of posts about this year’s Annual Meeting, SSP’s Marketing & Communications Committee cochairs ask members of our community what the conference meant to them

The post Ask the Community: What Did SSP 2022 Mean to You? appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Job: Community Engagement Lead | Moodle

As Community Engagement Lead, you will be proactive in building and growing Moodle community engagement in a variety of ways. With the pace of Moodle, no two days will ever be the same! But most days will involve a mix of:

Researching ideas and planning initiatives for enhancing community engagement
Collaborating with the Community engagement team in implementing initiatives
Recognising contributions and finding ways to encourage community contributions, ensuring voices are heard and fostering a positive culture
Create new networks, onboard new members and run online events (e.g. webinars)
Being active on moodle.org and on social media, making regular posts targeted at engagement initiatives

 

UG supports open access infrastructure provider OAPEN | University of Groningen Library | University of Groningen

“As of June 2022, the UG became a sponsoring member of OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks). The OAPEN Foundation is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to open access, peer-reviewed books. Its core mission is to increase the discoverability of open access books and to build trust around open access publishing….”

ARM/ASR Open Science Virtual Workshop 2022

“There is a growing number of efforts in the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility, Atmospheric System Research (ASR), and other communities to make scientific research, data, and software more open and accessible to the larger atmospheric science community. This multiday virtual workshop will serve as a mechanism to bring this larger community together to discuss and collaborate on open science topics, which include but are not limited to software, hardware, and data. The aim is to expose attendees to the spectrum of open science occurring in the ARM/ASR stakeholder community and to break down silos.

The workshop will take place May 10–13 from noon to 4 p.m. Eastern time with the first two days featuring two hours of talks and two hours of tutorials following for those who are interested….”

ARM/ASR OPEN SCIENCE WORKSHOP DRAWS AN ENGAGED AUDIENCE

“With support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility and Atmospheric System Research (ASR) program seek to make scientific research, data, and software more open and accessible.

The ARM/ASR Open Science Virtual Workshop 2022, held from May 10 to 13, provided a forum for discussion and discovery of open-science efforts within the atmospheric research community.

The workshop brought together people from DOE national laboratories, federal agencies, academia, and industry. ARM Instrument Operations Manager Adam Theisen, the workshop’s lead organizer, reported that 128 people attended at least one day….”

 

Taking an open science approach to publishing | Hindawi

“We are delighted to launch Hindawi’s journal reports today. These reports, developed with the help of DataSalon, showcase a range of journal metrics about the different publishing services we provide for our journals. By exposing more detailed data on our workflows – from submission through peer review to publication and beyond – we are giving researchers, partners, and funders a clearer view of what’s under the ‘journal hood’. We are also raising greater awareness of less talked-about services, such as how we are helping to make the publication process more equitable and published articles more accessible and discoverable.

This is the first phase of our journal reports and detailed metrics are available by following the “see full report” link from the journal’s main page. In this first phase, our reports give greater insight into acceptance rates and decision times, but also the median time in peer review and the median number of reviews per article. Alongside traditional metrics, such as citations and article views, the reports also display maps of the geographic distribution of authors, editors, and reviewers.

The final section demonstrates how we make articles more accessible and discoverable. It takes advantage of data from Crossref’s participation reports, which we extracted from Crossref’s open API. The section includes the percentage of articles in the journal that are open access (i.e. 100%), and the proportion of corresponding authors with an ORCID ID. It also shows the extent to which abstracts and citations are open. Hindawi supports the initiative for open citations (I4OC) and we are also a founding organisation for the initiative for open abstracts (I4OA). Because our metadata is machine readable and openly available, it makes the articles we publish more discoverable than publishers who don’t make this information openly available. The infrastructure for Open Access is also a key building block of Open Science….”

If they could, publishers would abolish libraries; here’s what they are doing instead – Walled Culture

“It is often said that if public libraries did not exist, modern publishers would never allow them to be set up, on the grounds that “clearly” every book loaned out was a sale lost. Fortunately, at the time that public libraries were created in various countries, publishers took a more enlightened view. Unfortunately, today’s publishers have realised that the transition from hard copy books to ebooks is an opportunity to try again, as Kyle K. Courtney, Copyright Advisor at Harvard Library, explains in an opinion piece for The Hill….”

A meta-research study of randomized controlled trials found infrequent and delayed availability of protocols – ScienceDirect

Abstract:  Objectives

Availability of randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocols is essential for the interpretation of trial results and research transparency.

Study Design and Setting

In this study, we determined the availability of RCT protocols approved in Switzerland, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom in 2012. For these RCTs, we searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and trial registries for publicly available protocols and corresponding full-text publications of results. We determined the proportion of RCTs with (1) publicly available protocols, (2) publications citing the protocol, and (3) registries providing a link to the protocol. A multivariable logistic regression model explored factors associated with protocol availability.

Results

Three hundred twenty-six RCTs were included, of which 118 (36.2%) made their protocol publicly available; 56 (47.6% 56 of 118) provided as a peer-reviewed publication and 48 (40.7%, 48 of 118) provided as supplementary material. A total of 90.9% (100 of 110) of the protocols were cited in the main publication, and 55.9% (66 of 118) were linked in the clinical trial registry. Larger sample size (>500; odds ratio [OR] = 5.90, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.75–13.31) and investigator sponsorship (OR = 1.99, 95% CI, 1.11–3.59) were associated with increased protocol availability. Most protocols were made available shortly before the publication of the main results.

Conclusion

RCT protocols should be made available at an early stage of the trial.

Netherlands lagging behind in healthcare digitisation

The Netherlands must change its approach to promoting digitisation in the Dutch healthcare sector, according to a study conducted by UT (Sustainable Healthcare Technology, TechMed Centre, and the Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences) and commissioned by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The study makes it clear that there is still a lot of work to be done when it comes to implementing technology in healthcare. “Digitisation is about more than just the use of technology – above all, it’s about a different way of working, and that requires vision, guts and leadership”, says UT professor Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen.

Guest Post — Striking the Right Chord with Millennial and GenZ Researchers

To what extent are scholarly publishers and societies actively engaging with early career researchers? Findings from a white paper, and polls at the SSP annual meeting, are shared.

The post Guest Post — Striking the Right Chord with Millennial and GenZ Researchers appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

De Gruyter launches not-for-profit foundation: De Gruyter eBound | STM Publishing News

“De Gruyter, independent scholarly publisher and founder of the University Press Library distribution model, is launching De Gruyter eBound, a not-for-profit foundation, in the United States. The initiative’s goal is to support the publishing, sustainability, and accessibility of mission-driven scholarly monographs for not-for-profit and Open Access publishers.

Among other planned activities, De Gruyter eBound will offer grants for new publications as well as fund original studies that help key actors in the industry to develop new solutions for and insights on the future of the mission-driven scholarly monograph….”

Building Data Resilience Through Collaborative Networks | Educopia Institute

“The aim of this symposium is to share information and best practices on the opportunities, challenges, models, methodologies, successes, and collaborative strategies concerning data sharing for digital scholarship, science, and community formation more broadly. The broad audience addressed will include faculty, librarians, technologists, and university administrators interested in these topics….”

It is not transformation if nothing changes – Science & research news | Frontiers

“The substantial benefits of open access (OA) publishing are within our reach, but legacy publishers are employing commercial tactics to delay the necessary transition.

This paper exposes several of the negative, often unintended, consequences of “transformative agreements” (TAs).  It argues that these agreements, sold as a pathway to open science, in fact reinforce the status quo.  TAs maintain paywalled access as the standard financial model in publishing.  They are negotiated in the absence of basic competition and procurement rules.  And by concentrating resources into silos for a few incumbents only, they pose a threat to the diversity of the publishing ecosystem, locking out innovators, including the very players who demonstrate the benefits of OA publishing.  Deployed as a commercial tactic, these agreements will stall the establishment of a transparent and competitive marketplace for professional editorial services….:”