This week, we listen to the latest episode of the Not Just Patients podcast and share an opportunity to contribute to the future of patient-centric healthcare. We signpost two upcoming webinars about maintaining research integrity, and we read the results of a survey exploring the language preferences of authors in the APAC region. Finally, we read about the societal impact of open science, the proliferation of retracted articles in references lists, and advice for authors looking to publish OA on a limited budget.
To listen to:
Patient involvement in medical publications via Not Just Patients | 1-hour listen
In this latest episode of the Not Just Patients podcast – titled Medical publications: from access to patient authorship – join co-hosts Caitlin Rich and Clarinda Cerejo as they talk with Avishek Pal (Global Medical Director, Cell & Gene Therapy at Novartis) about the importance of plain language research content and patient engagement.
To engage with:
Public consultation: Patient Engagement & Patient Experience Data project via PFMD
Help shape the future of patient-centric healthcare! Patient-Focused Medicines Development (PFMD) is seeking public input on the Patient Engagement (PE) & Patient Experience Data (PED) project. The initiative aims to create a PE & PED Integrated Navigator to guide stakeholders in implementing meaningful PE in their studies. Feedback on the draft navigator content, usability and format is welcomed from anyone with an interest in PE. More information about the consultation can be found in this PDF.
AI and research integrity via UKRIO
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to augment scientific research, but could this come at the cost of undermining research integrity? Join this free webinar from the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) on Wednesday 9 October to explore how research governance and ethics can be used to safeguard integrity while AI is integrated into daily practice.
Creating a culture of candour via ALPSP
How can publishing professionals support a culture of honesty, transparency and accountability in academic research? Join speakers Martin Delahunty (Founder and Director of Inspiring STEM Consulting), Ed Gerstner (Director of Research Environment Alliances at Springer Nature), Rachael Gooberman-Hill (Co-chair of the UK Committee on Research Integrity) and Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe (Professor & Coordinator for Research Professional Development at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign) on Tuesday 8 October as they explore the role of different stakeholders in maintaining research integrity. This webinar is free for Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) members.
To read:
Author preferences: supporting English language publication development in the APAC region via Current Medical Research and Opinion | 21-minute read
English is often the default language for medical publications. But is this ‘one-language-fits-all’ approach leading to the loss of medical and scientific detail? This article presents the results of a survey of publication professionals and authors involved in publication development in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. The authors conclude that it is “important to consider the diverse language, cultural, and communication preferences of all stakeholders involved in the development of publications in APAC”.
Open science’s societal impact via LSE Impact Blog | 6-minute read
Does open science impact wider society? In this blog post, Nicki Lisa Cole (Senior Researcher at Know Center) explores the results of her recent article titled The societal impact of open science: a scoping review. Along with her co-authors, Nicki found that “opening the scientific process leads to a diversity of beneficial societal impacts.”
Retracted references via Nature | 10-minute read
Retractions are used to protect and correct the scholarly record from unreliable, erroneous, fabricated and falsified findings. However, retracted articles can continue to influence the scientific literature through citations. This review of data from the Feet of Clay Detector – a tool that identifies papers citing retracted or problematic research – identifies the publications with the highest proportions of retracted citations in their reference lists, some of which are as high as 65%!
Publishing OA on a budget via Nature | 6-minute read
Article processing charges for open access (OA) articles can represent significant financial barriers for authors, especially those from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this career feature, Nature seeks advice from three researchers on the support available for authors in LMICs wishing to publish OA.
Enjoy our content? Read last week’s digest and check out our latest guest blog!
Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter/X and LinkedIn for regular updates!
