This week, we read about publishers’ perspectives on PLS and about ways in which collaboration tools can help facilitate open science. We learn about how OPUS is promoting open science by building a more inclusive approach to research assessment and the challenges Research4Life faces to achieving equitable access to science. We also learn how citizen scientists have helped to better understand the fruit fly’s brain. Finally, we signpost a webinar that will explore how Crossref metadata can help implement CREC recommendations.
To read:
Publisher perspectives on PLS via Medical Writing | 23-minute read
Plain language summaries (PLS) are easy-to-read summaries of scientific research articles. But how many journals allow authors to submit PLS? See the results of this survey study, conducted by Open Pharma, in which 29 publishers share their perspectives on PLS. The results of the survey “highlight the need for more journals to accept PLS”. The authors recommend that journals follow best practice recommendations to ensure PLS are peer reviewed and easily findable. Download the infographic or watch this video to learn more.
Collaborative tools for open science via the Center for Open Science | 8-minute read
“Collaboration transforms innovative scientific ideas into meaningful, reproducible research,” reports Brooklyn Olson (Senior Technical Writer at Don’t Use This Code) in this guest post for the Center for Open Science. The author describes how collaboration tools such as Git and GitHub can help “improve the quality of your – and your colleagues’ – work” while benefitting research and public policy. Register for any free NASA Transform to Open Science Training to explore more open science skills.
Reshaping research assessment in Europe via Open and Universal Science | 5-minute read
The Open and Universal Science (OPUS) project is developing new metrics to create a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to research assessment than that offered by traditional indicators (e.g. bibliometrics, impact factors). The project extends across Europe and involves the research performing organizations Nova University Lisbon, the University of Rijeka and the University of Cyprus, together with research funding organizations the Research Council of Lithuania and the Romanian Executive Unit for the Financing of Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation. Learn more about each organization’s commitment to open science in this article and see how the OPUS project is “shaping a new approach to research assessment by encouraging open science practices”.
Equitable scholarly communication via The Scholarly Kitchen | 8-minute read
Is equitable scholarly communication realistic or idealistic? In this guest post, Daniel Dollar (Associate University Librarian for Scholarly Resources at Yale University) describes Research4Life, a project that provides institutions in low- and middle-income countries with access to academic and peer-reviewed content. The author describes highlights of the collaborative Country Connector programme and discusses challenges around awareness and funding, echoing a “call for increased backing of the equity goals that are at the heart of Research4Life’s work”.
Citizen science for big data projects via Nature | 4-minute read
Citizen scientists and volunteers played a critical role in mapping the brain of a fruit fly, per this report in Nature. The ‘FlyWire Connectome’, which was predicted to take many years, has already helped advance our understanding of how the brain works. Citizen scientists stepped in by fact-checking artificial intelligence-generated data and helping complete the project in “record time,” says Mala Murthy (Director of the Princeton Neuroscience Institute and Co-founder of FlyWire). Learn more about the project at this free webinar on Tuesday 29 October.
To engage with:
Recording retractions, removals and expressions of concern via Crossref
Finding and citing the most up-to-date research is vital to maintain scientific accuracy. The Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern (CREC) Working Group previously published best practices for the “creation, transfer, and display of metadata related to retractions, removals, or expressions of concern.” Join Martyn Rittman (Product Manager at Crossref) and Caitlin Bakker (Discovery Technologies Librarian at the University of Regina and Co-chair of the CREC Working Group) for this free webinar on 30 October as they discuss how to implement the CREC recommendations in Crossref.
Enjoy reading our content? Read last week’s digest here and check out our latest guest blog!
Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter/X and LinkedIn for regular updates!
