This week, PLOS announces the launch of five new journals to complement its open access journal suite, and we learn that ORCID users will now be able to use the CRediT taxonomy to specify their contribution to research articles. Meanwhile, the American Chemical Society and Syracuse University form a new read-and-publish deal, and the Open Access Button rebrands to OA.Works. We also learn about the benefits of young peer reviewers and the challenges facing open access in health economics and outcomes research. Finally, we look at the viability of new open access business models.
PLOS heralds imminent launch of five new journals via The Official PLOS Blog | 7-minute read
PLOS has announced that it is launching five new open access journals later in 2021. The journals, which will complement the publisher’s existing suite of seven open access journals, are the first new open access journals from PLOS in 14 years. The new titles, PLOS Climate, PLOS Digital Health, PLOS Global Public Health, PLOS Sustainability and Transformation and PLOS Water, aim to help address current global health and environmental challenges. PLOS hopes that the new journals will support open access publishing in field-specific and regionally appropriate ways.
CRediTing ORCID via ORCID | 4-minute read
ORCID records will now include functionality to credit research contributors with 14 different roles as outlined by the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT). CRediT has been used in journals since 2016 and is the standard among more than 30 publishers. Acknowledging the 14 diverse contributor roles, including software, resources and project administration, will promote recognition for all research contributions in both a human- and machine-readable way.
ACS and Syracuse University sign transformative agreement via ACS | 4-minute read
The American Chemical Society (ACS) and New York-based Syracuse University (SU) have agreed on a read-and-publish transformative agreement. This will allow SU researchers who want or need to publish open access in ACS journals to do so with financial support from SU. Researchers at SU will also benefit from complete access to ACS journals and ACS’s news website Chemical & Engineering News.
Open Access Button now OA.Works via OA.Works | 2-minute read
The Open Access Button organization, which develops free and simple tools to facilitate open access, has been rebranded as OA.Works. OA.Works incorporates three existing products: ShareYourPaper, a drag-and-drop open access deposit, InstantILL, which enables subscription-free interlibrary loans, and OAButton, a browser plug-in that helps researchers access paywalled papers for free (legally).
Could children peer review your research? via Nature Index | 4-minute read
The journal Frontiers for Young Minds (FYM) was launched in 2013 to help create research articles that are accessible to people of all ages. The open access journal notably has a panel of reviewers that are between the ages of 8 and 15. This piece from Nature Index extols the benefits, from a researcher’s perspective, of writing for a young, non-specialist audience. Publishing in FYM can help hone a researcher’s ability to communicate in plain language and disseminate their research effectively.
How is the drive for open access affecting health economics and outcomes research? via ISPOR | 17-minute read
The latest issue of Values & Outcomes Spotlight from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) discusses the impact of the rapidly changing publishing landscape on health economics and outcomes research (HEOR). The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of rapid dissemination of accessible medical data, which could be achieved through the implementation of open access models and preprint portals. This issue highlights the challenges of open access funding, weighs up the pros and cons of preprints, and considers the threat of predatory journals. Questions remain over who should foot the bill for new open access publishing models and ensure effective peer review in HEOR.
Making open access business models work for all via The Scholarly Kitchen | 9-minute read
Reporting from the third CHORUS Forum meeting, The Scholarly Kitchen discusses key themes and conclusions from the session ‘Making the future of open research work’. The report focuses on the merits and shortcomings of different open access business models. It also suggests that the biggest obstacle organizations are facing in driving forward open access is gathering and analysing author data. In addition, moving away from the article processing charge model, which works for some authors but not others, is crucial for the future viability of open access business models.
We at Open Pharma would like to continue to encourage all our readers to look after themselves and their community and to continue to follow advice from their country’s government and health organizations.
Coronavirus mental health and well-being resources:
