Thursday, March 20, 2008

B - Teamwork saves review time in neuroscience

Teamwork saves review time in neuroscience. March 2008 Research Information

After the PubMed Plus Conference in June 2007, in an unprecedented move, a group of neuroscience journals have agreed to share reviewers' comments among each other and formed the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium (NPRC). The NPRC hopes that reducing the number of times a manuscript is reviewed, will reduced the load on reviewers and editors, so the publication of research results will be much faster. The review-forwarding system, the procedure adopted by the NPRC, could also lead to the increasing of submissions to high-profile journals, given the expedited re-submitting procedures. The Consortium currently consists of 22 journals, with another six in the process of joining.

http://www.researchinformation.info/news/news_story.php?news_id=226

B - Quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies

Macdonald S, Kam J. Aardvark et al.: quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies. Journal of Information Science 2007;33(6):702-717
doi: 10.1177/0165551507077419

This paper analyses the notion of 'quality journal', as the publication in so defined journals has become a major indicator of research performance in UK universities. The indicator, as often happens, has become the target, so the challenge is to publish in quality journals, and the challenge rewards gamesmanship. In the rush to win the game, publication as a means of communicating research findings for the public benefit, remains all but forgotten. Even if the paper analyses the situation in management studies, it underlines that the problem is much more widespread and concludes that laughter probably, on top of being the appropriate reaction to such farce, could also be a stimulus to reform.

http://jis.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/6/702

B - Clinical knowledge: from access to action

Clinical knowledge: from access to action. The Lancet 2008;371(9615):785
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60351-7

Harvard is making an institutional commitment to open-access publishing, and several leading universities are now preparing to follow its example. Traditional publishers responded to the research community's interest in wider access to medical science with a strategy unlikely to send a positive signal to the medical research community, such as cost-cutting and job losses. Confronting a future in which the next 20 years may change more than the past 200, editors and publishers should instead join doctors in working to achieve the highest standards of health for the community.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T1B-4S0JSP4-1&_user=2754627&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000057973&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=2754627&md5=6425f8625a48e401207eab64157382c1

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

W - TopCited in differnt disciplines

Scopus (http://www.scopus.com/) has recently released TopCited
(http://info.scopus.com/topcited/), a free service informing about the
most-cited recent articles (2004-2008)in various disciplines. Users can also view the top 20 articles from the past 3, 4, or 5 years in one
of the 26 subject areas, and view the authors' institutions on a Google Map.

http://info.scopus.com/topcited/

B - Mandatory Health

Takeuchi Cullen L. Mandatory Health. Time, March, 2008

Among the ten revolutionary ideas that will change how the world works, Time includes "Mandatory Health". The article appearing in Time, reviews the story of healthcare in America, citing an article from the New England Journal of Medicine, and suggests that soon the boss may tell employees to get healthy, or get lost. Considering that some bosses are already screening job applicants, the article hints also that in a not too distant future they will also ask for a a clean bill of health.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1720049_1720050_1721661,00.html

B - Effectiveness of Journal Ranking

Stringer MJ, Sales-Pardo M, Nunes Amaral LA (2008) Effectiveness of Journal Ranking Schemes as a Tool for Locating Information. PLoS ONE 3(2): e1683.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001683

Electronic publishing, preprint archives, blogs, and wikis raise concerns among all stakeholders in the editorial chain about the relevance of traditional peer reviewed journals. These concerns are increased by the ability of search engines to identify and sort information. This article points out that the distribution of the number of citations to a paper published in a given journal in a specific year converges to a steady state after a journal-specific transient time, and demonstrate that in the steady state the logarithm of the number of citations has a journal-specific typical value. A model was developed to enable to quantify both the typical impact and the range of impacts of papers published in a journal. A journal-ranking scheme is proposed to maximizee the efficiency of locating high impact research.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0001683#aff2

B - Elsevier Agrees to Let MIT Use Bits of Journal Articles Online

Young J R. Elsevier Agrees to Let MIT Use Bits of Journal Articles Online. 2008 The Chronicle of Higher Education

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced that it has reached a deal with Elsevier to allow a limited amount of material from its journals to be used in MIT’s OpenCourseWare project, winning a major challenge for colleges that want to post lecture materials on the Web. The vice president and general counsel at Elsevier, declared that the company has also agreed to a new policy on copyright, set up by the International Association of Scientific, Technical, & Medical Publishers, allowing any college to post small bits of journal material online, even if the policy doesn’t allow quite as much as the deal with MIT does.

http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/article/2805/elsevier-agrees-to-let-mit-use-bits-of-journal-articles-online

Sunday, March 16, 2008

B - Electronic publishing in librarianship and information science in Latin America

Johnson JM, Cano V. Electronic publishing in librarianship and information science in Latin America – a step towards development? Information Research 2008, 13(1, March)

The paper draws on the results of studies carried on between 2004 and 2007 as part of Project REVISTAS, supported by the European Commission's ALFA Programme. Through a variety of methods results, the weaknesses of the printed scholarly publication process for library and information science is pointed out. The emergence of electronic publication is identified and the potential it presents is discussed. If scholarly publication in this discipline within Latin America is to achieve its potential, both in the dissemination of research and in the education of students, the opportunities presented by electronic publication and archiving must be grasped, but the full benefits cannot be achieved without attention to the need for peer review and other quality control methods. We believe this considerations are valid also in other fields. The value of this articles is also in pointing out the major information networks of Latin America




http://informationr.net/ir/13-1/paper331.html

Monday, March 10, 2008

B - Science 2.0: Great New Tool, or Great Risk?

Waldrop MM. Science 2.0: Great New Tool, or Great Risk? Scientific
American 9 January 2008.

The article describes how researchers are beginning to harness wikis, blogs and other Web 2.0 technologies as a potentially transformative way of doing science. The author invites also readers to comment on the draft article, promising that the input given will influence the article’s content in its final form. Starting from common questions on Web 2.0 tools, the article analyses the promise and peril of Science 2.0, which the author considers as being one aspect of a broader Open Science movement, which also includes Open-Access scientific publishing and Open Data practices. A small but growing number of researchers have begun to carry out their work via these new tools, while many scientists still remain highly skeptical of such openness.Science 2.0 advocates, however, consider this movement as a new opportunity of collaboration between scientist.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=science-2-point-0-great-new-tool-or-great-risk&print=true

Sunday, March 09, 2008

B - Tale of two citations

M Errami, H Garner. Tale of two citations. Nature 2008 (451): 397 - 399 2008).
doi:10.1038/451397a

Are scientists publishing more duplicate papers? An automated search of seven million biomedical abstracts suggests that they are. High-profile cases of scientific misconduct remind us that not all those publications are to be trusted.
The scientific community must be aware that The three major sins of modern publishing (duplication, co-submission and plagiarism) are becoming widespread.



http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7177/full/451397a.html#B1

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

B - Acceptance of the JISC/SURF Licence to Publish & accompanying Principles by traditional publishers of journals

Beunen A. Acceptance of the JISC/SURF Licence to Publish & accompanying Principles by traditional publishers of journals December 2007 Surf Foundation

This report presents the results of an enquiry carried out among 47 traditional publishers of journals. The study asked publishers if they support the Principles formulated by SURFfoundation and JISC, which attempt to clarify and balance the relationship between the rights of authors and publishers. The main points of this Principles are: that the author retains copyright of his/her work, while granting the publisher the rights needed to publish the work, and that the author may freely deposit the article in a research repository, with an embargo before public release of maximum six months. The results showed that a substancial number of traditional publishers support some or all of these Principles or are looking into changes in their current policies to meet these Principles.

http://www.surffoundation.nl/download/LtP-final-report-dec07.pdf

Sunday, March 02, 2008

B - Journals to Print Author Names in Chinese, Japanese and Korean

[American Physical Society. 2008 [Heading in Chinese characters!]. APS News 17(2)1.

The APS journals now offer authors the option to include their names in either Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters following the name as it appears in Latin characters. The progam, announced in December, is offered to author by-lines throughout the Physical Review journals, including Physical Review Letters. The option offers advantages to these authors and to readers of the journal. Many names that are different when expressed in characters become the same when transliterated into English. Showing the characters after the transliterated name removes the ambiguity, and enables readers to know definitively whose work is whose. With time and experience additional languages may be offered. Instructions for authors on how to supply the proper Unicode characters at the time of submission are at http://authors.aps.org/names. html.


http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200802/printinchinese.cfm

Posted for John Glen