“As a conclusion, too often, the discussion on open access models is sometimes completely confused, sometimes too simplistic, and usually based on undue generalization of local situations and even singular experiences. It doesn’t reflect properly the variety of parameters that influence the way research is practiced and communicated amongst peers and towards societies at large. Therefore, we desperately need a better-informed discussion based on case studies and probably driven by the actor-network theory because it allows for a modelling of how diverse stakeholders interact in the scholarly communication process. Because we need not only open access, but above all open scholarly communication models that serve the actual needs of the research communities and societies to create knowledge and benefit from it, we need an open access model based on bibliodiversity.”
Abstract: Utah State University is home to a Digital Commons repository and an instance of the Digital Measures activity-reporting tool. The prospect of linking these two systems, such that content is automatically harvested from Digital Measures for upload into the Digital Commons, is alluring. Our initial efforts were abandoned due to lack of faculty permissions and low-quality metadata. However, with the passage of an Institutional Open Access Policy, we resumed investigation. We found that the process of harvesting from Digital Measures and uploading to Digital Commons could be streamlined, if not fully automated. Our initial harvest revealed that human-mediation is desirable.
“On this page you will find indicators on how the policies of journals and funding agencies favour open access, and the percentage of publications (green and gold) actually available through open access.
The indicators cover bibliometric data on publications, as well as data on funders’ and journals’ policies. Indicators and case studies will be updated over time.”
“Open access is growing across the industry, but it can be hard to know which articles are open and which are subscription. Being able to easily find and identify open access content saves researchers time and effort. With Elsevier’s new partnership with Impactstory, a nonprofit that creates online tools to make science more open and reusable, researchers will soon be able to find open access content on Scopus more efficiently. Meanwhile, for university research offices, the expansion of OA-identified content in Scopus will enable improved strategic analysis and benchmarking.
“The open access movement has done a great job of making content open, but it hasn’t always made this open content easy to find,” said Jason Priem, co-founder of Impactstory. “By partnering with Elsevier, we’re are able to get that OA content out there where it can be used. We think this is a key step toward a more powerful, universally open science communication ecosystem.” The agreement will enable Elsevier to integrate document-level OA data from Impactstory’s Unpaywall database with Scopus content; identification and tagging of Scopus’ OA peer-reviewed articles will begin in August and roll out through November 2018….”
Abstract: The PASTEUR4OA project analyses what makes an Open Access (OA) policy effective. The total number of institutional or funder OA policies worldwide is now 663 (March 2015), over half of them mandatory. ROARMAP, the policy registry, has been rebuilt to record more policy detail and provide more extensive search functionality. Deposit rates were measured for articles in institutions’ repositories and compared to the total number of WoS-indexed articles published from those institutions. Average deposit rate was over four times as high for institutions with a mandatory policy. Six positive correlations were found between deposit rates and (1) Must-Deposit; (2) Cannot-Waive-Deposit; (3) Deposit-Linked-to-Research-Evaluation; (4) Cannot-Waive-Rights-Retention; (5) Must-Make-Deposit-OA (after allowable embargo) and (6) Can-Waive-OA. For deposit latency, there is a positive correlation between earlier deposit and (7) Must-Deposit-Immediately as well as with (4) Cannot-Waive-Rights-Retention and with mandate age. There are not yet enough OA policies to test whether still further policy conditions would contribute to mandate effectiveness but the present findings already suggest that it would be useful for current and future OA policies to adopt the seven positive conditions so as to accelerate and maximise the growth of OA.
“Experts say the database of carefully curated medical guidelines is one of a kind, used constantly by medical professionals, and on July 16 will ‘go dark’ due to budget cuts.
The Trump Administration is planning to eliminate a vast trove of medical guidelines that for nearly 20 years has been a critical resource for doctors, researchers and others in the medical community. Maintained by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ], part of the Department of Health and Human Services, the database is known as the National Guideline Clearinghouse [NGC], and it’s scheduled to “go dark,” in the words of an official there, on July 16. Medical guidelines like those compiled by AHRQ aren’t something laypeople spend much time thinking about, but experts like Valerie King, a professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Director of Research at the Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University, said the NGC is perhaps the most important repository of evidence-based research available. “Guideline.gov was our go-to source, and there is nothing else like it in the world,” King said, referring to the URL at which the database is hosted, which the agency says receives about 200,000 visitors per month. “It is a singular resource,” King added. Medical guidelines are best thought of as cheatsheets for the medical field, compiling the latest research in an easy-to use format. When doctors want to know when they should start insulin treatments, or how best to manage an HIV patient in unstable housing — even something as mundane as when to start an older patient on a vitamin D supplement — they look for the relevant guidelines. The documents are published by a myriad of professional and other organizations, and NGC has long been considered among the most comprehensive and reliable repositories in the world. AHRQ said it’s looking for a partner that can carry on the work of NGC, but that effort hasn’t panned out yet. “AHRQ agrees that guidelines play an important role in clinical decision making, but hard decisions had to be made about how to use the resources at our disposal,” said AHRQ spokesperson Alison Hunt in an email. The operating budget for the NGC last year was $1.2 million, Hunt said, and reductions in funding forced the agency’s hand.”
“MOAI, an Open Access Server Platform for Institutional Repositories
MOAI is a platform for aggregating content from different sources, and publishing it through the Open Archive Initiatives protocol for metadata harvesting. It’s been built for academic institutional repositories dealing with relational metadata and asset files. What does it do? —————- The MOAI software can aggregate content from different sources, transform it and store it in a database. The contents of this database can then be published in many separate OAI feeds, each with its own configuration. The MOAI software has a very flexible system for combining records into sets, and can use these sets in the feed configuration. It also comes with a simple yet flexible authentication scheme that can be easily customized. Besides providing authentication for the feeds, the authentication also controls the access to the assets. Why MOAI ——– MOAI has been specifically developed for universities, and contains a lot of hard-earned wisdom. The software has been in production use since 2007, and new features have been continually added. In late 2008, the software was completely refactored and packaged under the name “MOAI”. You can read more about this on the `MOAI History`_ page. MOAI is a standalone system, so it can be used in combination with any repository software that comes with an OAI feed such as `Fedora Commons`_, `EPrints`_ or `DSpace`_. It can also be used directly with an SQL database or just a folder of XML files. The MOAI project takes the philosophy that every repository is different and unique, and that an institutional repository is a living thing. It is therefore never finished. Metadata is always changes, improving, and evolves. We think this is healthy. Because of this viewpoint, the MOAI software makes it as easy as possible to add or modify parts of your repository (OAI) services stack. It tries to do this without sacrificing power, and encouraging the re-use of components….”
“In order to better coordinate a repository ecology that includes multitudinous individual systems, and synthesize staff knowledge and expertise that spans decades, the Repository Principles subgroup of CUL’s Repository Executive Group (RepoExec) has created this open handbook of repository principles and strategies.
The handbook provides support for both new and existing repository managers, comprising both recommended practices and specifically identified action steps that will allow them to track their progress and identify gaps. Each section of the handbook covers a different strategic area of repository management, standing largely on its own and linking to other sections when appropriate. Although there is no primary section order, we recommend starting with Repository Scope and Service Planning.
The handbook specifically addresses principles and practices pertaining to digital repositories, where a digital repository can be defined as: a system, the purpose of which is to store, present, and preserve a collection of data for which the library provides services. That is, the term refers specifically to the application as opposed to the content (collections, objects and metadata) within.
Additionally, the handbook is designed to engender a larger conversation about repository management practices, both at Cornell and beyond. As such, it is a living document that RepoExec will continue to edit and update in response to changes in the repository landscape and feedback from readers. While the handbook points to Cornell-specific service centers for providing in-house services and consulting, it is our hope that the document may be useful to a readership beyond the Cornell University Library….”