Research Publications Manager at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

“The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine is a world-leading center for research and postgraduate education in public and global health. Our mission is to improve health and health equity in the UK and worldwide; working in partnership to achieve excellence in public and global health research, education and translation of knowledge into policy and practice. 

The Library & Archives Service of this major international postgraduate medical school is seeking an enthusiastic and innovative individual to develop, deliver and promote Scholarly Communications across the institution, and to manage LSHTM Research Online, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine’s institutional repository for research publications. The successful candidate will have proven experience of effectively delivering support for open access publishing and of managing an institutional repository, and demonstrable knowledge of best practice and innovation in scholarly communication and of the administration of article processing charges.”

Barriers to Working With National Health Service England’s Open Data | Bacon | Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:  Open data is information made freely available to third parties in structured formats without restrictive licensing conditions, permitting commercial and noncommercial organizations to innovate. In the context of National Health Service (NHS) data, this is intended to improve patient outcomes and efficiency. EBM DataLab is a research group with a focus on online tools which turn our research findings into actionable monthly outputs. We regularly import and process more than 15 different NHS open datasets to deliver OpenPrescribing.net, one of the most high-impact use cases for NHS England’s open data, with over 15,000 unique users each month. In this paper, we have described the many breaches of best practices around NHS open data that we have encountered. Examples include datasets that repeatedly change location without warning or forwarding; datasets that are needlessly behind a “CAPTCHA” and so cannot be automatically downloaded; longitudinal datasets that change their structure without warning or documentation; near-duplicate datasets with unexplained differences; datasets that are impossible to locate, and thus may or may not exist; poor or absent documentation; and withholding of data for dubious reasons. We propose new open ways of working that will support better analytics for all users of the NHS. These include better curation, better documentation, and systems for better dialogue with technical teams.

 

UKeiG CPD Workshop: Open access, open monographs, open data, open peer review

“The concept of Open Access to research outputs has been common currency for many years. The rapid growth of the Internet has made different publication models easily available. More recent thinking has expanded the concept of openness even further, to Open Science, which aims to transform science by making research more open, global, collaborative, creative and closer to society. This approach is being embraced by all academic disciplines, including the humanities and social sciences. The shift is extremely important for the development and exploitation of research, and hence for the professionals who support it.

Who should attend?

Research support, information and library professionals keen to understand the impact of Open Access, Open Data, Open Monographs, Open Peer Review and Open Science on their organisations and on current and future service provision. The key aim of the workshop is to provide a state of the art overview of Open Science issues and to encourage discussion amongst library and information professionals who support research. It will benefit LIS professionals across all subjects, sectors and disciplines who are new to, interested in or needing a refresher on Open Access issues….”

Adoption of the open access business model in scientific journal publishing – A crossdisciplinary study

Abstract:  Scientific journal publishers have over the past twenty-five years rapidly converted to predominantly electronic dissemination, but the reader-pays business model continues to dominate the market. Open Access (OA) publishing, where the articles are freely readable on the net, has slowly increased its market share to near 20%, but has failed to fulfill the visions of rapid proliferation predicted by many early proponents. The growth of OA has also been very uneven across fields of science. We report market shares of open access in eighteen Scopus-indexed disciplines ranging from 27% (agriculture) to 7% (business). The differences become far more pronounced for journals published in the four countries, which dominate commercial scholarly publishing (US, UK, Germany and the Netherlands). We present contrasting developments within six academic disciplines. Availability of funding to pay publication charges, pressure from research funding agencies, and the diversity of discipline-specific research communication cultures arise as potential explanations for the observed differences.

December 2019 open access update now available | Jisc scholarly communications

“A range of enhancement reports in this issue. To pick a couple: we are delighted to report that Publications Router is now receiving feeds from 11 publishers and feedback from users suggests that the service is increasing in importance to institutional workflows. We are also very pleased to have added nearly 900 new repositories to OpenDOAR after working with CORE colleagues and carrying out some extensive QA work to resolve previously unlisted repositories. As the dust from the general election settles and policies are announced, we are looking forward to using the capabilities we have built into our new Romeo infrastructure to respond to national policy compliance. We talked a little about this at our recent event on “Planning for Plan-S”, which was well received by attendees with some good conversations and thinking about the challenge, and all this in the midst of REF preparations.  The event has given us some very useful feedback for future institutional needs. As we go forward into REF and Plan S next year, we will all face challenges and changes, but we are here to support you throughout. As ever, get in touch with us and tell us about the way you use our services: what you like, what you don’t like and anything you would like to see improved….”

Open Access Service Manager – Job Opportunities – University of Cambridge

“The Open Access Service in the Office of Scholarly Communication processes several hundred articles per month into Apollo, the University repository www.repository.cam.ac.uk. The repository holds over 200,000 items and stores, disseminates and preserves in the long-term the broader intellectual output of the university in digital formats, including databases, multi-media files, e-science outputs, theses, learning objects and electronic. To ensure efficient engagement with the “open” agenda, the Office of Scholarly Communication delivers numerous advocacy and training events across the University of Cambridge.

Working within the Office of Scholarly Communication at the University Library, the Open Access Service Manager will lead the team that delivers a researcher-focused service in support of open research. This involves the provision of information, training and advice to all academic and research staff required or wishing to publish articles via open access. They will be responsible for managing the RCUK and COAF funds of over £2 million annually, including signing off on invoices up to £6,000.

In addition the role holder will be expected to manage the reporting requirements to the research community, University Executive and the funding bodies and will be expected to represent the Office of Scholarly Communication on various committees. The key goal will be to ensure that the majority of the University research publication output is compliant with funder, University and publisher policies and that the University has a process to support open research that is affordable and sustainable….”

Are huge genetic databases leaving marginalized people out of their data? | Salon.com

“However, as promising as biobanks might seem, the data may tell only partial or even misleading stories. Criticisms of the project include that the research coming out of the UK Biobank will only benefit certain people, and even then, the usefulness of the health associations found are under question.

Compared to the 2011 UK census, Black, Indian, Pakistani and Chinese participants are all underrepresented in the Biobank by at least one third. David Curtis, at University College London, tested whether this under-representation of ethnic minority groups has any impact on schizophrenia genetics research….”

Are huge genetic databases leaving marginalized people out of their data? | Salon.com

“However, as promising as biobanks might seem, the data may tell only partial or even misleading stories. Criticisms of the project include that the research coming out of the UK Biobank will only benefit certain people, and even then, the usefulness of the health associations found are under question.

Compared to the 2011 UK census, Black, Indian, Pakistani and Chinese participants are all underrepresented in the Biobank by at least one third. David Curtis, at University College London, tested whether this under-representation of ethnic minority groups has any impact on schizophrenia genetics research….”