DOCSLIB.ORG

PLOS Biology Open Research: Protocols in PLOS ONE

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

COVID-19, Open Research, Trust and Transparency Niamh O’Connor │ March 2021 …is a nonprofit, Open Access publisher empowering researchers to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication. We propelled the movement for OA alternatives to subscription journals. We established the first multi-disciplinary publication inclusive of all research regardless of novelty or impact. And we demonstrated the importance of open data availability. All articles across our journals are published under CC BY licence. From Open Access to Open Science How do we co-create a system that’s open for everyone? From Open Access to Open Research “Openness enables researchers to address entirely new questions and work across national and disciplinary boundaries.” NASEM Report, Open Science by Design, 2018 The chain, whereby new scientific discoveries are built on previously established results, can only work optimally if all research results are made openly available to the scientific community.’ Schiltz M (2018), PLoS Biol 16(9): e3000031. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000031 Open research increases trust https://www.pewresearch.org/f act-tank/2019/10/04/most- americans-are-wary-of- industry-funded-research/ Copyright 2019 Pew Research Center Trends: impact of the early months of the pandemic April 2020 theplosblog.plos.org/2020/04/learning-how-we-can-support-researchers-during-covid-19/ Open Research: Pre-prints Note: 2018 figures are from May; 2021 is to mid-February; Percentages are of those articles suitable for posting Open Research: Re-examining peer review Created by ASAPBio and EMBO Press: Independent peer review before journal submission which aims to ‘empower authors by providing them with a Refereed Preprint and facilitating its submission to affiliate journals, https://www.reviewcommons.org/about/ C19 Rapid Review A cross-publisher rapid review and review transfer initiative, Sarah Greaves & Jon Treadway, https://www.digital- science.com/blog/perspectives/does-creating-a-rapid-reviewer-pool-improve- trust-in-covid-19-peer-review/ Open Research: Published peer review Introduced May 2019: Opt-in rate across the portfolio: 40%; varying from 66% to 37% Open Research: Data PLOS journals require authors to make all data >148,000 articles needed to replicate the findings described in their published in PLOS journals with manuscript accessible Data Availability without restriction, at the Statements time of publication. 25% with data in public repositories Where there are specific legal or ethical restrictions, Supplementary information in authors must indicate how others may obtain access to the data. Open Research: Data Colavizza G, Hrynaszkiewicz I, Staden I, Whitaker K, McGillivray B (2020) The citation advantage of linking publications to research data. PLoS ONE 15(4): e0230416. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230416 Open Research: Registered Reports >200 journals have adopted registered reports including PLOS ONE and PLOS Biology https://cos.io/rr/ Open Research: Protocols in PLOS ONE Lab Protocols Lab Protocols describe verified, In collaboration reusable methodologies with in all fields of study Study Protocols Study Protocols describe detailed plans and proposals for research projects that have not yet generated results Open Research: PLOS Biology redefining selectivity Selection criteria focusing on the research question and approach, rather than results Enable transition from publishing as an event to publishing as process - exploratory and confirmatory research Research is a global, collaborative enterprise Participation in sharing knowledge is equally as important as access to the published literature We need to move away from entrenched inequities and focus on creation of shared value Build an equitable system of knowledge Enable a move towards ‘open to read, open to publish’ Build partnerships and trust for the long term Allow everyone to benefit from investment of public money Pricing, transparency and equitable participation The cost of publishing is part of the cost of research Increased focus on pricing, transparency and inclusion • Plan S price transparency framework: PLOS’ framework is available from The Official PLOS Blog theplosblog.plos.org/ • Developing models ‘beyond the APC’ building equitable participation: Community Action Publishing, designed for selectivity plos.org/resources/community-action-publishing/ Flat Fee Agreements, simplifying publication fees plos.org/resources/for-institutions/flat-fee-agreements/ Pricing, transparency and equitable participation Source: UNESCO World Science Report, Towards 2030 2015, https://unesdoc .unesco.org/ark :/48223/pf0000 235406 shared under CC BY-SA 3.0 license Reimagining scholarly communication Increased benefit to society as a whole Increased speed of discovery and innovation Greater inclusion in the research process Greater availability of trustworthy information COVID-19, Open Research, Trust & Transparency .
Recommended publications
  • When Is Open Access Not Open Access?

    When Is Open Access Not Open Access?

    Editorial When Is Open Access Not Open Access? Catriona J. MacCallum ince 2003, when PLoS Biology Box 1. The Bethesda Statement on Open-Access Publishing was launched, there has been This is taken from http:⁄⁄www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm. a spectacular growth in “open- S 1 access” journals. The Directory of An Open Access Publication is one that meets the following two conditions: Open Access Journals (http:⁄⁄www. 1. The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, doaj.org/), hosted by Lund University worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit Libraries, lists 2,816 open-access and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital journals as this article goes to press medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship2, as (and probably more by the time you well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use. read this). Authors also have various 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of “open-access” options within existing the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited subscription journals offered by immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported traditional publishers (e.g., Blackwell, by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well- Springer, Oxford University Press, and established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, many others). In return for a fee to interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central the publisher, an author’s individual is such a repository).
  • From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication

    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.
  • Open Access Availability of Scientific Publications

    Open Access Availability of Scientific Publications

    Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications* Final Report January 2018 By: Science-Metrix Inc. 1335 Mont-Royal E. ▪ Montréal ▪ Québec ▪ Canada ▪ H2J 1Y6 1.514.495.6505 ▪ 1.800.994.4761 [email protected] ▪ www.science-metrix.com *This work was funded by the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of NCSES or the NSF. The analysis for this research was conducted by SRI International on behalf of NSF’s NCSES under contract number NSFDACS1063289. Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators Open access availability of scientific publications Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. i Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. ii Figures ................................................................................................................................................................ ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................
  • Researcher Or Crowd Member? Why Not Both! the Open Research Knowledge Graph for Applying and Communicating Crowdre Research

    Researcher Or Crowd Member? Why Not Both! the Open Research Knowledge Graph for Applying and Communicating Crowdre Research

    Researcher or Crowd Member? Why not both! The Open Research Knowledge Graph for Applying and Communicating CrowdRE Research Oliver Karras∗, Eduard C. Groenyz, Javed Ali Khanx, Sören Auer∗ ∗Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology, Germany, {oliver.karras, soeren.auer}@tib.eu yFraunhofer IESE, Germany, [email protected] zDepartment of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, Netherlands xDepartment of Software Engineering, University of Science and Technology Bannu, Pakistan, [email protected] Abstract—In recent decades, there has been a major shift while this representation is easy for humans to process, it is towards improved digital access to scholarly works. However, poorly interlinked and not machine-actionable [3]. The next step even now that these works are available in digital form, they in the digital transformation of scholarly knowledge requires remain document-based, making it difficult to communicate the knowledge they contain. The next logical step is to extend a more flexible, fine-grained, semantic, and context-sensitive these works with more flexible, fine-grained, semantic, and representation that allows humans to quickly compare research context-sensitive representations of scholarly knowledge. The results, and machines to process them. This representation can Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG) is a platform that hardly be created automatically, but requires domain experts [1] structures and interlinks scholarly knowledge, relying on crowd- and an infrastructure for acquiring,
  • Open Research Online Oro.Open.Ac.Uk

    Open Research Online Oro.Open.Ac.Uk

    Open Research Online The Open University’s repository of research publications and other research outputs Using Songs to Enhance Language Learning and Skills in the Cypriot Primary EFL Classroom Thesis How to cite: Diakou, Maria (2013). Using Songs to Enhance Language Learning and Skills in the Cypriot Primary EFL Classroom. EdD thesis The Open University. For guidance on citations see FAQs. c 2013 The Author Version: Version of Record Copyright and Moral Rights for the articles on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. For more information on Open Research Online’s data policy on reuse of materials please consult the policies page. oro.open.ac.uk Maria Diakou, X7632338 Maria Diakou X7632338 Doctorate in Education (EdD) Using Songs to Enhance Language Learning and Skills in the Cypriot Primary EFL Classroom 9th APRIL 2013 1 Maria Diakou, X7632338 Abstract Although the role of songs in the primary EFL classroom has attracted the interest of a number of researchers (Newham 1995; McMullen and Saffran 2004; Millington 2011), given the frequency with which songs are being used in English language teaching classrooms, it might have been expected that Cyprus would wish to play a role in extending research findings and applying them to its own educational setting. Yet the lack of research with young learners is particularly acute in the Cypriot Primary School EFL context where pupils have been working for the last 15 years with very outdated textbooks. Evidence of the effectiveness of using songs to learn English has come mainly from studies in other countries mainly with older pupils in middle and high schools, (Adkins 1997; Millington 2011; Fonseca-Mora et al.
  • Open Access, Open Education and Open Data

    Open Access, Open Education and Open Data

    IFMSA Policy Proposal OpenAccess, OpenEducation and OpenData Proposed by Team of Officials Presented to the IFMSA General Assembly August Meeting 2017 in Arusha, Tanzania Policy Commission • Eleanor Parkhill, Medsin-UK, [email protected] • Kim van Daalen, IFMSA-The-Netherlands, ifmsa-the- [email protected] • Alexander Lachapelle, Liaison Officer for Medical Education issues, IFMSA, [email protected] Policy Statement Introduction Scholarly material is essential for research and education. Committing to making high value scientific knowledge accessible to researchers, scientists, entrepreneurs, and policy makers worldwide is a major step towards better health outcomes for all. Yet, cost barriers or use restrictions often prevent health professionals worldwide - and scientists from all areas - from engaging or consulting the very materials that report scientific discovery. Over the past decade, Open Access, Open Education & Open data have become central to advancing the interests of researchers, scholars, students, businesses and the public. Yet, while consulting academic journals, students face limited access to published research output, data and papers because of very high fees. The high cost of academic journals restricts the use of knowledge. A vast amount of research is funded from public sources – yet taxpayers are locked out by the cost of access. IFMSA Position The International Federation of Medical Students’ Associations (IFMSA) firmly believes in the importance of openness across all published research outputs (including among others, all online research output, peer-review and non-peer-reviewed academic journal articles, conference papers, theses, book chapters, monographs). Thereby IFMSA believes in the ability of openness to improve the educational experience, democratize access to research and education, advance research and education, and improve the visibility and impact of scholarship.
  • CORD-19: the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset

    CORD-19: the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset

    CORD-19: The COVID-19 Open Research Dataset Lucy Lu Wang1;∗ Kyle Lo1;∗ Yoganand Chandrasekhar1 Russell Reas1 Jiangjiang Yang1 Douglas Burdick2 Darrin Eide3 Kathryn Funk4 Yannis Katsis2 Rodney Kinney1 Yunyao Li2 Ziyang Liu6 William Merrill1 Paul Mooney5 Dewey Murdick7 Devvret Rishi5 Jerry Sheehan4 Zhihong Shen3 Brandon Stilson1 Alex D. Wade6 Kuansan Wang3 Nancy Xin Ru Wang 2 Chris Wilhelm1 Boya Xie3 Douglas Raymond1 Daniel S. Weld1;8 Oren Etzioni1 Sebastian Kohlmeier1 1Allen Institute for AI 2 IBM Research 3Microsoft Research 4National Library of Medicine 5Kaggle 6Chan Zuckerberg Initiative 7Georgetown University 8University of Washington flucyw, [email protected] Abstract The COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) is a growing1 resource of scientific papers on COVID-19 and related historical coronavirus research. CORD-19 is designed to facilitate the development of text mining and information retrieval systems over its rich collection of metadata and structured full text papers. Since its release, CORD-19 has been downloaded2 over 200K times and Figure 1: Papers and preprints are collected from dif- has served as the basis of many COVID-19 ferent sources through Semantic Scholar. Released as text mining and discovery systems. In this part of CORD-19 are the harmonized and deduplicated article, we describe the mechanics of dataset metadata and full text JSON. construction, highlighting challenges and key design decisions, provide an overview of how CORD-19 has been used, and describe of CORD-19. This resource is a large and growing several shared tasks built around the dataset. collection of publications and preprints on COVID- We hope this resource will continue to bring 19 and related historical coronaviruses such as together the computing community, biomed- SARS and MERS.
  • Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

    Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

    1 Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea? 1 2 3 2 Tony Ross-Hellauer , Birgit Schmidt , and Bianca Kramer 1 3 Know-Center, Austria, (corres. author: [email protected]) 2 4 Goettingen State and University Library, Germany 3 5 Utrecht University Library, Netherlands 6 May 23, 2018 1 PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.26954v1 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec: 23 May 2018, publ: 23 May 2018 7 Abstract 8 As open access to publications continues to gather momentum we should continu- 9 ously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this 10 space is the creation of open access publishing platforms commissioned by funding or- 11 ganisations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, 12 as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commis- 13 sion and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it 14 becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent 15 phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This 16 article examines ethical, organisational and economic strengths and weaknesses of such 17 platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats 18 presented by funder open access platforms in the ongoing transition to open access. The 19 article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, 20 finding them a novel intervention which stand to help increase OA uptake, control costs 21 of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commit- 22 ment to fostering open practices.
  • D2.3 Transport Research in the European Open Science Cloud 29

    D2.3 Transport Research in the European Open Science Cloud 29

    Ref. Ares(2020)5096102 - 29/09/2020 European forum and oBsErvatory for OPEN science in transport Project Acronym: BE OPEN Project Title: European forum and oBsErvatory for OPEN science in transport Project Number: 824323 Topic: MG-4-2-2018 – Building Open Science platforms in transport research Type of Action: Coordination and support action (CSA) D2.3 Transport Research in the European Open Science Cloud Final Version European forum and oBsErvatory D2.3: Transport Research in the European Open Science Cloud for OPEN science in transport Deliverable Title: Open/FAIR data, software and infrastructure in European transport research Work Package: WP2 Due Date: 2019.11.30 Submission Date: 2020.09.29 Start Date of Project: 1st January 2019 Duration of Project: 30 months Organisation Responsible of Deliverable: ATHENA RC Version: Final Version Status: Final Natalia Manola, Afroditi Anagnostopoulou, Harry Author name(s): Dimitropoulos, Alessia Bardi Kristel Palts (DLR), Christian von Bühler (Osborn-Clarke), Reviewer(s): Anna Walek, M. Zuraska (GUT), Clara García (Scipedia), Anja Fleten Nielsen (TOI), Lucie Mendoza (HUMANIST), Michela Floretto (FIT), Ioannis Ergas (WEGEMT), Boris Hilia (UITP), Caroline Almeras (ECTRI), Rudolf Cholava (CDV), Milos Milenkovic (FTTE) Nature: ☒ R – Report ☐ P – Prototype ☐ D – Demonstrator ☐ O – Other Dissemination level: ☒ PU - Public ☐ CO - Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission) ☐ RE - Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) 2 | 53 European forum and oBsErvatory D2.3: Transport Research in the European Open Science Cloud for OPEN science in transport Document history Version Date Modified by (author/partner) Comments 0.1 Afroditi Anagnostopoulou, Alessia EOSC sections according to EC 2019.11.25 Bardi, Harry Dimopoulos documents.
  • LIBER Open Science Roadmap Table of Contents

    LIBER Open Science Roadmap Table of Contents

    EUROPE’S RESEARCH LIBRARY NETWORK LIBER Open Science Roadmap Table of Contents 04 5. OPEN SCIENCE SKILLS 24 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY About LIBER 05 · Opportunities & Challenges 24 Introduction 06 · Recommendations 25 Cultural Change 09 Main Priorities 10 6. RESEARCH INTEGRITY 26 · Opportunities & Challenges 26 12 · Recommendations 27 SEVEN FOCUS AREAS 1. SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 14 7. CITIZEN SCIENCE 28 · Opportunities & Challenges 14 · Opportunities & Challenges 28 · Recommendations 16 · Recommendations 29 2. FAIR DATA 18 30 LOOKING FORWARD · Opportunities & Challenges 18 · Recommendations 19 32 OPEN SCIENCE CHAMPIONS · Karlsruhe Institute of Technology 34 3. RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURES & · National Library of Finland 36 THE EUROPEAN OPEN SCIENCE CLOUD 20 · Ruder Bošković Institute Library 38 · Opportunities & Challenges 20 · Spanish National Research Council 40 · Recommendations 21 · Svetozar Markovic University Library 42 · University of Barcelona 44 4. METRICS & REWARDS 22 · University College London 46 · Opportunities & Challenges 22 · University Library of Southern Denmark 48 · Recommendations 23 50 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 51 CREDITS About EXECUTIVE LIBER LIBER (Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes By 2022, we envision a world where: de Recherche – Association of European Re- SUMMARY search Libraries) represents 430 university, • Open Access is the predominant form of national and special libraries in 40 countries, publishing; making us Europe’s largest research library • Research Data is Findable, Accessible, network. Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR); • Digital Skills underpin a more open Our 2018-2022 Strategy, Powering Sus- and transparent research life cycle; tainable Knowledge in the Digital Age, • Research Infrastructure is participatory, outlines how libraries can prepare them- tailored and scaled to the needs of the Embracing Open Science is critical if we LIBER has shaped its 2018-2022 Strategy1 selves for coming changes in the research diverse disciplines; are to make science more collaborative, to support and enable Open Science and landscape.
  • Towards an Open Science Definition As a Political and Legal Framework: on the Sharing and Dissemination of Research Outputs

    Towards an Open Science Definition As a Political and Legal Framework: on the Sharing and Dissemination of Research Outputs

    Towards an Open Science definition as a political and legal framework: on the sharing and dissemination of research outputs Teresa Gomez-Diaz Laboratoire d'informatique Gaspard-Monge (LIGM), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), University of Gustave Eiffel (UGE), Marne-la-Vallée, France [email protected], orcid.org/0000-0002-7834-145X Tomas Recio University of Nebrija, Madrid, Spain [email protected], orcid.org/0000-0002-1011-295X This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ V3, 28th February 2021 Versions of this document Version Title Date Publication/Dissemination arXiv, HAL, POLIS, Zenodo. Towards an Open Science V3 definition as a political and legal 28/02/2021 Includes reference: framework: on the sharing and dissemination of research outputs Alma Swan, UNESCO, 2012 Towards an Open Science POLIS N. 19, 2020 V2 definition as a political and legal 12/2020 framework: on the sharing and http://uet.edu.al/polis/images/1.pdf dissemination of research outputs https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.04508 V1 A policy and legal Open Science 16/09/2020 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal- framework: a proposal 02962399 https://zenodo.org/record/4075106 p. 1 Abstract It is widely recognised nowadays that there is no single, accepted, unified definition of Open Science, which motivates our proposal of an Open Science definition as a political and legal framework where research outputs are shared and disseminated in order to be rendered visible, accessible, reusable is developed, standing over the concepts enhanced by the Budapest Open Science Initiative (BOAI), and by the Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) and Open data movements.
  • Plos Progress Update 2014/2015 from the Chairman and Ceo

    Plos Progress Update 2014/2015 from the Chairman and Ceo

    PLOS PROGRESS UPDATE 2014/2015 FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND CEO PLOS is dedicated to the transformation of research communication through collaboration, transparency, speed and access. Since its founding, PLOS has demonstrated the viability of high quality, Open Access publishing; launched the ground- breaking PLOS ONE, a home for all sound science selected for its rigor, not its “significance”; developed the first Article- Level Metrics (ALMs) to demonstrate the value of research beyond the perceived status of a journal title; and extended the impact of research after its publication with the PLOS data policy, ALMs and liberal Open Access licensing. But challenges remain. Scientific communication is far from its ideal state. There is still inconsistent access, and research is oered at a snapshot in time, instead of as an evolving contribution whose reliability and significance are continually evaluated through its lifetime. The current state demands that PLOS continue to establish new standards and expectations for scholarly communication. These include a faster and more ecient publication experience, more transparent peer review, assessment though the lifetime of a work, better recognition of the range of contributions made by collaborators and placing researchers and their communities back at the center of scientific communication. To these ends, PLOS is developing ApertaTM, a system that will facilitate and advance the submission and peer review process for authors, editors and reviewers. PLOS is also creating richer and more inclusive forums, such as PLOS Paleontology and PLOS Ecology Communities and the PLOS Science Wednesday redditscience Ask Me Anything. Progress is being made on early posting of manuscripts at PLOS.