DOCSLIB.ORG

Research Futures Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research Futures Report Research Drivers and scenarios futures for the next decade Full report www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-research-futures-report A study by Elsevier and Ipsos MORI Published February 2019 2 CONTENTS Contents Foreword - Alexander van Boetzelaer, EVP of Strategy, Elsevier 4 Introduction to the study 5 Visual overview of the study 6 Introducing the scenarios 8 Brave open world 10 Tech titans 16 Eastern ascendance 22 Conclusion – what we learned and Elsevier’s plans 28 Essay one: Funding the future 31 Essay two: Pathways to open science 49 Essay three: How researchers work: change ahead 66 Essay four: Technology: revolution or evolution 83 Essay five: Building the future research information system 106 Essay six: The academy and beyond 119 Methodology 136 Acknowledgements 139 3 FOREWORD Foreword It’s not enough to think about the future – you have to build it At Elsevier, we have constantly pushed boundaries in our efforts to support researchers. From helping exiled German scientists in the late ‘30s to publish their works, to pioneering the digital dissemination of journals on ScienceDirect; we’ve never been afraid to take bold steps. We are currently on the cusp of a new era, one that will likely transform the research information system. Drawing on our roots in publishing, we are creating analytical solutions to serve the needs of science and health. Whatever the future holds, by applying technological and data expertise, we will continue with our mission to help institutions and professionals advance scientific knowledge and health care. We also recognize that it has never been more important to collaborate closely with research institutes, funders and other information providers, enabling a quicker response to genuine needs faced by those in the field. To equip us all with the knowledge required to navigate the opportunities – and challenges – that lie ahead, we have partnered with Ipsos MORI to examine the research landscape in detail, both what is happening and what could happen in the decade to come. In this report, we share with you the insights we’ve gleaned from a great variety of stakeholders. Focusing on a single potential outcome is problematic. Instead, we’ve thought about a number of possible, plausible futures. Our goal is that these scenarios will fuel considered, controlled decisions. Our founding motto remains apt: Non Solus – Not Alone. By working together today, we can shape a more positive tomorrow. Please do contact us with your thoughts and ideas – you can find out how in the conclusion. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Alexander van Boetzelaer EVP of Strategy, Elsevier 4 INTRODUCTION Introduction Why we did this project The interviews and literature review sketched a picture of the many interrelated trends; taken together with the Rarely in the history of science, technology and medicine researcher survey, they helped us identify the factors most have we witnessed such rapid and profound change. likely to drive change, a summarized version of which Advances in technology, funding pressures, political can be found in the visual overview on pages 6 to 7. We uncertainty, population shifts, societal challenges on took these 19 key drivers, grouped them into themes, and a global scale; these elements are all combining – in turned them into the six essays you’ll find on pages 31 to uncertain ways – to transform how research information 135. The essays explain why each driver could potentially is created and exchanged. cause seismic change and how that change might come The ability of the research community to thrive in this new to pass. world will depend on understanding the opportunities However, looking at each of the key drivers in isolation, or and the challenges these changes offer and what steps even linking them to a theme, wasn’t enough to provide need to be taken now. the insights we were seeking. So, during 2018, we held To assess how today’s trends might shape the research several creative workshops and invited external experts landscape in the decade ahead, Elsevier joined forces to join us. In the workshops we used the key drivers to with Ipsos MORI, the global market and opinion develop plausible future scenarios, all set a decade from research specialist. Together, we conducted a large-scale, now, which we ultimately reduced to three – you can find future-scoping and scenario-planning study. The focus these on pages 10 to 27. of this study was not which topics will be researched 10 Along with the 19 key drivers and the six essays, the years from now, but rather how that research might be three scenarios form the key findings of this study. conducted and its findings communicated. In the conclusion, on pages 28 to 30, we look at the What we did implications of these scenarios and the plans that Elsevier is putting in place in response to this study. We We reviewed the literature and examined market drivers. also invite you to join us. And we have created a webpage Critically, we interviewed expert stakeholders to gather on Elsevier.com1 where we will continue to monitor the their views and elicited the opinions of researchers. market-available data and track progress towards the Over the course of 2018, we talked with 56 experts from scenarios we’ve imagined. While no-one knows what the funders and futurists to publishers and technology future holds, our hope is that this report, particularly the experts, and we surveyed more than 2,000 researchers. scenarios, will help us all understand the implications We started all our expert interviews with the same of the decisions we make today and ensure we are well question – if you could discover one thing about the world placed to meet the future – whatever it brings. of research 10 years from now, what would you want to know? This helped participants to focus on the questions and challenges already keeping them up at night, and identify issues likely to increase in importance over the coming decade. 1 www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-research-futures-report 5 VISUAL OVERVIEW VISUAL OVERVIEW Building a guide to the future Together, the drivers, essays and scenarios form the key findings of this study. A visual overview of the study DISCOVERY PHASE ANALYSIS PHASE SCENARIO BUILDING PHASE Step 4 Step 1 19 key drivers were identified, each of which THEME FOUR: Technology: revolution LITERATURE REVIEW is expected to shape developments in the or evolution? WORKSHOPS decade to come. These drivers (abbreviated 10. Big data is fast becoming the lifeblood Comprehensive review of the versions of which are listed below), have of nearly all research Three one-day workshops were published literature. been grouped into six themes. 11. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine- held with internal and external u Visit Mendeley2 to explore the learning tools are changing the shape experts. Attendees considered how references used in this report u Find the comprehensive versions of the drivers of science the 19 key drivers might influence and their associated essays on pages 31 to 135. 12. Blockchain has the potential to facilitate research. open science, but the technology is The result: Three credible scenarios, THEME ONE: Funding the future still in its infancy and may not fulfil each imagining what the future 1. The funding mix is changing; public its promise might look like a decade from now. funders will have less influence over 13. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality research priorities (VR) will become key learning tools for a 2. China is stepping up the funding and number of institutes Step 2 production of research 3. The research agenda is changing; EXPERT INTERVIEWS there is an increased focus on making THEME FIVE: Building the future Scenario one: research accessible research information system Brave open world Interviews with 56 technology, 14. The role of the journal is transforming to State and philanthropic funders align in their research and publishing experts meet modern needs goals, approaches and principles, resulting around the globe. THEME TWO: Pathways to open science 15. The article structure is evolving and new in open science taking off, aided by artificial u See who we interviewed in the 4. Research grants will increasingly have forms will become the norm intelligence-enabled technologies. Acknowledgements on page 139 open science conditions attached 16. The measurement system will become 5. Researchers are expected to spearhead even more critical adoption of open science, but not without experiencing conflicts of interests Scenario two: Tech titans 6. Metrics will continue to expand, enabled THEME SIX: The academy and beyond by new technology Technology companies support the research 17. Courses will diversify from a lecture- ecosystem and become knowledge creators focused model and curators in a world where industry funds 18. Higher education institutions are more and more research. THEME THREE: How researchers work: changing structure Step 3 change ahead 19. EdTech will become a serious higher 7. New technologies are expected to education contender RESEARCHER SURVEY transform the researcher workflow over the Scenario three: coming 10 years Eastern ascendance A survey of 2,055 researchers 8. Behaviors and skillsets will change as a China’s growing economic power and worldwide, asking them what they new generation of researchers arrives on focus on research and development (R&D) think the future holds. the scene influences the previously Western-dominated u The full survey results are 9. Collaboration will drive research forward research landscape, resulting in a fragmented 3 available on Mendeley Data world. 2 www.mendeley.com/community/research-futures u Read more about the methodology on pages 136 to 138. 3 https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/w6mj4tmkxp/1 6 7 VISUALIZING THE FUTURE THROUGH SCENARIOS 8 VISUALIZING THE FUTURE THROUGH SCENARIOS VISUALIZING THE FUTURE THROUGH SCENARIOS Visualizing the future through scenarios Together, Elsevier and Ipsos MORI used the trends, survey results and expert input to develop three scenarios which explore what the research ecosystem might look like a decade from now: These scenarios are Brave open world, Tech titans and Eastern ascendance.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plan S in Latin America: a Precautionary Note
    Plan S in Latin America: A precautionary note Humberto Debat1 & Dominique Babini2 1Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (IPAVE-CIAP-INTA), Argentina, ORCID id: 0000-0003-3056-3739, [email protected] 2Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO), Argentina. ORCID id: 0000-0002- 5752-7060, [email protected] Latin America has historically led a firm and rising Open Access movement and represents the worldwide region with larger adoption of Open Access practices. Argentina has recently expressed its commitment to join Plan S, an initiative from a European consortium of research funders oriented to mandate Open Access publishing of scientific outputs. Here we suggest that the potential adhesion of Argentina or other Latin American nations to Plan S, even in its recently revised version, ignores the reality and tradition of Latin American Open Access publishing, and has still to demonstrate that it will encourage at a regional and global level the advancement of non-commercial Open Access initiatives. Plan S is an initiative from a European consortium of research funders, with the intention of becoming international, oriented to mandate Open Access publishing of research outputs funded by public or private grants, starting from 2021. Launched in September 2018 and revised in May 2019, the plan supported by the so-called cOAlition S involves 10 principles directed to achieve scholarly publishing in “Open Access Journals, Open Access Platforms, or made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo” [1]. cOAlition S, coordinated by Science Europe and comprising 16 national research funders, three charitable foundations and the European Research Council, has pledged to coordinately implement the 10 principles of Plan S in 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of External Whistleblowers on Uncovering Corruption: a Comparative Study
    The Impact of External Whistleblowers on Uncovering Corruption: A Comparative Study Carmen Apaza PhD Candidate of Public Administration and Policy School of Public Affairs American University [email protected] Yongjin Chang PhD Candidate of Public Administration and Policy School of Public Affairs American University [email protected] Work in progress – please do not cite Paper to be presented to Ethics and Integrity of Governance European Group of Public Administration Rotherdam, Netherlands September, 2008 The Impact of External Whistleblowers on Uncovering Corruption: A Comparative Study Carmen Apaza & Yongjin Chang1 Abstract Through an original comparative framework as well as archival and pattern matching research methodology, this paper analyzes two important whistleblowing cases in Peru and South Korea. The study finds strong evidence to conclude that external whistlebowing is effective, mass media is a valuable tool for external whistleblowers, powerful allies and strong evidences are crucial factors for making whistle-blowing process easier, and external whistle- blowing works out even in the absence of sufficient legal protection. Nevertheless external whistleblowers experience severe retaliation when there is no proper legal protection. The findings of this study suggest that whistle-blowing is a crucial instrument to improve government accountability and transparency. Hence, it should be considered beyond national boundaries. 1 Both authors are equally contributed to write this paper. 2 Introduction Whistleblowing can be defined as a disclosure of information by an employee or contractor who alleges willful misconduct carried out by an individual or group of individuals within an organiztion (Figg 2000). A whistleblower is a valuable information source that the government or the public cannot get from any oversight systems, because they are insiders of the organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Publishing Infrastructure
    RatSWD Working Paper www.ratswd.de Series Flipping journals to open: 251 Rethinking publishing infrastructure Benedikt Fecher and Gert G. Wagner December 2015 Working Paper Series of the German Data Forum (RatSWD) The RatSWD Working Papers series was launched at the end of 2007. Since 2009, the series has been publishing exclusively conceptual and historical works dealing with the organization of the German statistical infrastructure and research infrastructure in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. Papers that have appeared in the series deal primarily with the organization of Germany’s official statistical system, government agency research, and academic research infrastructure, as well as directly with the work of the RatSWD. Papers addressing the aforementioned topics in other countries as well as supranational aspects are particularly welcome. RatSWD Working Papers are non-exclusive, which means that there is nothing to prevent you from publishing your work in another venue as well: all papers can and should also appear in professionally, institutionally, and locally specialized journals. The RatSWD Working Papers are not available in bookstores but can be ordered online through the RatSWD. In order to make the series more accessible to readers not fluent in German, the English section of the RatSWD Working Papers website presents only those papers published in English, while the German section lists the complete contents of all issues in the series in chronological order. The views expressed in the RatSWD Working Papers are exclusively the opinions of their authors and not those of the RatSWD or of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research. The RatSWD Working Paper Series is edited by: Chair of the RatSWD (since 2014 Regina T.
    [Show full text]
  • Taking Mendeley As Multimedia-Based Application in Academic Writing
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Institutional Repository Vol.6 (2016) No. 4 ISSN: 2088-5334 Taking Mendeley as Multimedia-based Application in Academic Writing Andi Anto Patak#+1, Hamimah Abu Naim#2, Rahmat Hidayat* # Measurement and Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor 83100, Malaysia E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] +English Department, Faculty of Languages and Literature, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia *Department of Information Technology, Politeknik Negeri Padang, Padang, Sumatra Barat, Indonesia E-mail: [email protected] Abstract — Mendeley is one of the references managers that provide web, desktop, and mobile version. This research aims at exploring the Indonesian Mendely users’ preference on Mendeley use as multimedia-based application in academic writing. The researchers conducted survey research design to find data for deciding the obvious groups’ characteristics on certain topic or issue in a diverse group. Data on this research was taken in 2015 to explore 100 Indonesian Mendeley users’ preference on Mendeley features as web based application in academic writing. The researchers used weighted average find out rate and percentage adjusment for the influence of a binary confounder. The weighted average in this research was automatically generated by SurveyMonkey analytic. This research indicated what Mendeley features as multimedia web application for academic writing that Indonesian Mendeley users took in and out. Keywords— Mendeley; multimedia-based application; academic writing. well as search for author. Additionally, Mendeley makes I. INTRODUCTION users easy to have some documents open at once, and to Mendeley is essentially a reference manager for easily move them by dragging from one folder to dropping organizing sources [1]-[6].
    [Show full text]
  • Sci-Hub Provides Access to Nearly All Scholarly Literature
    Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature A DOI-citable version of this manuscript is available at https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3100. This manuscript was automatically generated from greenelab/scihub-manuscript@51678a7 on October 12, 2017. Submit feedback on the manuscript at git.io/v7feh or on the analyses at git.io/v7fvJ. Authors • Daniel S. Himmelstein 0000-0002-3012-7446 · dhimmel · dhimmel Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, University of Pennsylvania · Funded by GBMF4552 • Ariel Rodriguez Romero 0000-0003-2290-4927 · arielsvn · arielswn Bidwise, Inc • Stephen Reid McLaughlin 0000-0002-9888-3168 · stevemclaugh · SteveMcLaugh School of Information, University of Texas at Austin • Bastian Greshake Tzovaras 0000-0002-9925-9623 · gedankenstuecke · gedankenstuecke Department of Applied Bioinformatics, Institute of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Goethe University Frankfurt • Casey S. Greene 0000-0001-8713-9213 · cgreene · GreeneScientist Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, University of Pennsylvania · Funded by GBMF4552 PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3100v2 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec: 12 Oct 2017, publ: 12 Oct 2017 Abstract The website Sci-Hub provides access to scholarly literature via full text PDF downloads. The site enables users to access articles that would otherwise be paywalled. Since its creation in 2011, Sci- Hub has grown rapidly in popularity. However, until now, the extent of Sci-Hub’s coverage was unclear. As of March 2017, we find that Sci-Hub’s database contains 68.9% of all 81.6 million scholarly articles, which rises to 85.2% for those published in toll access journals.
    [Show full text]
  • From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 2019 From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication Rob Johnson Research Consulting Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Johnson, Rob, "From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication" (2019). Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.. 157. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/157 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Insights – 32, 2019 Plan S and the future of scholarly communication | Rob Johnson From coalition to commons: Plan S and the future of scholarly communication The announcement of Plan S in September 2018 triggered a wide-ranging debate over how best to accelerate the shift to open access. The Plan’s ten principles represent a call for the creation of an intellectual commons, to be brought into being through collective action by funders and managed through regulated market mechanisms. As it gathers both momentum and critics, the coalition must grapple with questions of equity, efficiency and sustainability. The work of Elinor Ostrom has shown that successful management of the commons frequently relies on polycentricity and adaptive governance. The Plan S principles must therefore function as an overarching framework within which local actors retain some autonomy, and should remain open to amendment as the scholarly communication landscape evolves.
    [Show full text]
  • March 13, 2019 AMS Primer on Open Access
    Robert M. Harington Associate Executive Director, Publishing Publishing Division [email protected] 401.455.4165 401.331.3842 www.ams.org AMS Primer on Open Access Introduction Open access (OA) refers to published scholarly content (such as journal research articles, and books) made openly available in online digital form. This content is free of charge at point of use, free of most copyright and licensing restrictions, and free of technical or other barriers to access (such as digital rights management or requirements to register to access). Communicating and sharing discoveries is an essential part of the research process. Any author of a research paper wants it to be read, and the fewer restrictions placed on access to those papers means that more people may benefit from the research. In many ways, the OA movement is very much in line with the shared mission of researchers, scholarly societies, and publishers. Journal publishing programs perform many services for researchers including peer review, communication, and career advancement. In society publishing programs, revenue from journal publishing directly supports the important work societies do on behalf of their scholarly communities. How do we maximize the dissemination of knowledge while at the same time maintaining both a high level of quality and a sustainable financial future for our professional society, the AMS? The OA movement can be traced to a letter from the year 2000, signed by around 34,000 researchers, demanding publishers make all content free after 6 months. The signatories of the letter said they would boycott any journals refusing to comply. In 2002, the accepted definition of OA was encapsulated in the Budapest Open Access Initiative declaration.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge Working Paper Economics
    Faculty of Economics Cambridge Working Paper Economics Cambridge Working Paper Economics: 1753 PUBLISHING WHILE FEMALE ARE WOMEN HELD TO HIGHER STANDARDS? EVIDENCE FROM PEER REVIEW. Erin Hengel 4 December 2017 I use readability scores to test if referees and/or editors apply higher standards to women’s writing in academic peer review. I find: (i) female-authored papers are 1–6 percent better written than equivalent papers by men; (ii) the gap is two times higher in published articles than in earlier, draft versions of the same papers; (iii) women’s writing gradually improves but men’s does not—meaning the readability gap grows over authors’ careers. In a dynamic model of an author’s decision-making process, I show that tougher editorial standards and/or biased referee assignment are uniquely consistent with this pattern of choices. A conservative causal estimate derived from the model suggests senior female economists write at least 9 percent more clearly than they otherwise would. These findings indicate that higher standards burden women with an added time tax and probably contribute to academia’s “Publishing Paradox” Consistent with this hypothesis, I find female-authored papers spend six months longer in peer review. More generally, tougher standards impose a quantity/quality tradeoff that characterises many instances of female output. They could resolve persistently lower—otherwise unexplained—female productivity in many high-skill occupations. Publishing while Female Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review.∗ Erin Hengely November 2017 I use readability scores to test if referees and/or editors apply higher standards to women’s writing in academic peer review.
    [Show full text]
  • Steering Science Through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 9-2019 Steering science through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism Ulrich Herb Saarland University & State Library Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Herb, Ulrich, "Steering science through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism" (2019). Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.. 125. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/125 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Steering science through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism Published in: Proceedings of the 23rd Congress of the European Society of Veterinary and Comparative Nutrition (ESVCN 2019), Turin/ Italy, 17-20 September 2019. Author: Ulrich Herb, ORCID: 0000-0002-3500-3119 Affiliations: Saarland University & State Library ./scidecode science consulting & research Please cite as: Herb, Ulrich (2019). Steering science through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism. Proceedings of the 23rd Congress of the European Society of Veterinary and Comparative Nutrition, Turin 2019. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.3333395 Performance tracking in science Since the mid-1920s, a scientist's performance was tracked by using bibliometric information such as the number of publications or their citations. Today, there are unprecedented possibilities for controlling science by analysing data on production and use of scientific information, so that citations only play a subordinate role in the evaluation of science.
    [Show full text]
  • Mendeley As a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Purdue E-Pubs Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Proceedings of the IATUL Conferences 2014 IATUL Proceedings Jun 3rd, 12:00 AM Mendeley as a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status Stefanie Haustein Universite de Montreal, [email protected] Vincent Larivière Universite de Montreal, [email protected] Stefanie Haustein and Vincent Larivière, "Mendeley as a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status." Proceedings of the IATUL Conferences. Paper 2. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iatul/2014/altmetrics/2 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. MENDELEY AS A SOURCE OF GLOBAL READERSHIP BY STUDENTS AND POSTDOCS? EVALUATING ARTICLE USAGE BY ACADEMIC STATUS Stefanie Haustein École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information, Université de Montréal C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7 (Canada) [email protected] Vincent Larivière École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information, Université de Montréal C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7 (Canada) Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST), Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST), Université du Québec à Montréal CP 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3P8, (Canada) [email protected] Abstract This paper explores readership counts provided by the social reference manager Mendeley as a source for usage statistics for scientific papers, based on a sample of 1.2 million documents published in journals from the four disciplines Biomedical Research, Clinical Medicine, Health and Psychology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Carnage of Substandard Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Call for Quality Katrina a Bramstedt ‍ 1,2
    Brief report J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/medethics-2020-106494 on 1 October 2020. Downloaded from The carnage of substandard research during the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for quality Katrina A Bramstedt 1,2 1Luxembourg Agency for ABSTRACT issued (tables 2 and 3).ii The source of most of these Research Integrity, Esch- sur- Worldwide there are currently over 1200 research studies incidents is Asia (n=19; 57.6%), with China the Alzette, Luxembourg 2 largest Asian subgroup (n=11; 57.9%). For three Bond University Faculty of being performed on the topic of COVID-19. Many of Health Sciences and Medicine, these involve children and adults over age 65 years. papers, the reason for the removal is unknown; Gold Coast, Queensland, There are also numerous studies testing investigational however, for the others, a range of problems Australia vaccines on healthy volunteers. No research team exist, including data falsification, methodological is exempt from the pressures and speed at which concerns, and concerns about interpretation of data Correspondence to COVID-19 research is occurring. And this can increase and conclusions, as well as authorship and research Professor Katrina A Bramstedt, participant privacy issues (table 4). To date, there Bond University Faculty of the risk of honest error as well as misconduct. To date, Health Sciences and Medicine, 33 papers have been identified as unsuitable for public have been no identified reports of plagiarism or Gold Coast, Queensland, use and either retracted, withdrawn, or noted with data fabrication. Another paper, a preprint from the Australia; concern. Asia is the source of most of these manuscripts USA about COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence, has txbioethics@ yahoo.
    [Show full text]
  • So... Who Knows How to Unblur Course Hero
    WHAT IS MYPAPERHUB PRICING MY ACCOUNT BLOG GET STARTED So... Who Knows How to GIVE YOUR GPA A BOOST Unblur Course Hero Academic level Select Documents?? Type Of Paper Select Deadline Select Research is now publicly available! You can now have access Pages to a research portal, which, when entering a research paper's - 1 + 275 words DOI, unlocks all research papers behind a paywall! This could certainly place a cat amongst the pigeons...Ever encounte...Read More $19.00 UNLOCK ~Posted on Apr 2019 Create PDF in your applications with the Pdfcrowd HTML to PDF API PDFCROWD Create PDF in your applications with the Pdfcrowd HTML to PDF API PDFCROWD Create PDF in your applications with the Pdfcrowd HTML to PDF API PDFCROWD Create PDF in your applications with the Pdfcrowd HTML to PDF API PDFCROWD Research is now publicly available! You can now have access to a research portal, which, when entering a research paper's DOI, unlocks all research papers behind a paywall! This could certainly place a cat amongst the pigeons... Ever encountered those on sites with a paywall that's required to view the research paper you want to read? There’s the rst option of having to ask the researcher directly, and they may just share it with you. But if, in reality, it's so complex proves on all COMBINED levels to be IMPOSSIBLE to untangle within an enforced time-frame: well, on the brighter side you simply type the URL into Sci-Hub to get free access to it https://qoo.ly/33wa5e Seriously can anyone disagree! The iconoclastic types with a scientic bent like the pharmacist who gave up drugs and somehow has now become the drug industry's bête noire might just as well argue that this is piracy, scam, or stealing.
    [Show full text]