Abstract: In this presentation, the editor and managing editor of the Georgia Library Quarterly (GLQ), the journal of the Georgia Library Association, will provide a brief history of the journal and share information related to current publication practices, in addition to discussing future plans, with a focus on sustainability, including maintaining a robust editorial board, ensuring a reliable peer review process, and the importance of legacy planning to make sure that future editors gain the knowledge and expertise to continue to successfully manage and publish a long-standing and vital journal for Georgia librarians and librarianship. GLQ is published by Kennesaw State University’s Digital Commons. GLQ is an open access publication that applies the Creative Commons Attribution License to all articles, with authors retaining the copyright while allowing others to reuse and copy the article, provided the original authors and source are cited. Attendees of the presentation will gain insight on how an open access learned society journal with an all-volunteer editorial board operates and learn ways to maintain continuity with publishing practices to promote sustainability.
Abstract: The ultimate goal of engineering in medicine and biology (EMB) researchers is to improve medical care for patients and communities all over the world by providing a collaborative environment for engineer-scientists and clinicians. In order for this collaboration to occur, however, there must be a widely indexed platform that promotes communication among researchers across a spectrum of nations, both economically developed and underdeveloped, and between engineer-scientists and clinicians who are less likely to have access to IEEE Xplore. In response to this need, the EMB Society (EMBS) created the Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine (JTEHM), its first Gold Open Access (OA) journal. At its inception in 2012, JTEHM outlined a bold, comprehensive objective: Our unique mission—to bring together scientific researchers, practicing clinicians, and engineers to develop actionable, practical solutions for patients, families, and caregivers—requires open communication and free access
“The mission of The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety is to improve health care quality, safety, and value by providing professionals and researchers a learning community to share innovative thinking, strategies, and practices. Although we publish a wide range of research in quality and safety, we emphasize rigorous, generalizable quality improvement research that our readers can use to improve care at their own institutions. Thus, our ultimate metric of success should be how often organizations read our articles, apply what they learn, and improve care and patient outcomes. Unfortunately, no such measure exists, so we must rely on several proxies, including downloads and references to the articles in press coverage and social media.”
From Google’s English: “From the beginning of this year it will be even more worthwhile to publish your original works, overviews and casuistics in “The Pathologist”. In addition to the wide reach in the magazine’s subscriber base, which reaches a large number of pathologists in Germany, you have also been able to publish your freely submitted works on the DEAL Open Access project since the beginning of the year . In the following we would like to inform you about its general conditions.”
Abstract: This editorial announces this journal’s policy on transparency, openness and replication. From 1 July 2020, authors of manuscripts submitted to Journal of Health Psychology (JHP) are required to make the raw data fully accessible to all readers. JHP will only consider manuscripts which follow an open publication model defined as follows: M = Mandatory, I = Inclusion (of), R = Raw, D = Data (MIRD). All data and analytical procedures must be sufficiently well described to enable a third party with the appropriate expertise to replicate the data analyses. It is expected that findings and analyses in the JHP will be fully capable of being accurately reproduced.
“Responsible data sharing offers considerable benefits to researchers, funding agencies and the public. It promotes transparency in research, facilitates novel scientific inquiry, avoids duplication of effort and maximises benefits of the original research investment. We believe that Prosthetics and Orthotics International can play an important role in promoting and supporting data sharing initiatives. When appropriate, and with careful attention to ethical principles, we encourage our authors to share their research data in reputable data repositories.”
Abstract: This editorial describes new initiatives designed to promote and maintain open science practices (OSP) at the Journal of Traumatic Stress, to be enacted beginning January 2020. Following a brief description of the rationale underlying the argument for conducting and reporting research in ways that maximize transparency and replicability, this article summarizes changes in Journal submission and publication procedures that are designed to foster and highlight such practices. These include requesting an Open Science Practices Statement from authors of all accepted manuscripts, which will be published as supplementary material for each article, and providing authors with the opportunity to earn OSP badges for preregistering studies, making data available to other researchers by posting on a third party archive, and making available research materials and codes used in the study.
“At Thorax [a journal from BMJ] we embrace this new pathway to publishing medical research findings and we welcome the submission of manuscripts which have previously appeared on a preprint server. We do, however, ask all submitting authors to make this clear in the covering letter at the time of submission. The first batch of 10 articles, which previously appeared as preprints, have been through peer review with Thorax. The acceptance of articles which have previously appeared as a preprint is now widespread among medical journals.5 6 Acceptance of preprints is, however, not universal and authors are well advised to check the guidelines of their target journals before they post a preprint….
In due course, when the COVID-19 curve (flattened or otherwise) hits baseline, researchers and journals must use the preprint literature wisely and as it is intended—as a way to share research data rapidly before formal expert review in a journal. Any individual claims should be treated with healthy scepticism, until verified by peer review. …”
Abstract: In response to recent JCF Editorials regarding academic publishing, we highlight efforts to promote transparency, foster open access and recognize methodological contributions to CF [Cystic Fibrosis] clinical/translational research. We believe these efforts have been vital to improve methodological rigor and clinical impact of published research.
Abstract: Sharing data and code are important components of reproducible research. Data sharing in research is widely discussed in the literature; however, there are no well-established evidence-based incentives that reward data sharing, nor randomized studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of data sharing policies at increasing data sharing. A simple incentive, such as an Open Data Badge, might provide the change needed to increase data sharing in health and medical research. This study was a parallel group randomized controlled trial (protocol registration: doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/PXWZQ) with two groups, control and intervention, with 80 research articles published in BMJ Open per group, with a total of 160 research articles. The intervention group received an email offer for an Open Data Badge if they shared their data along with their final publication and the control group received an email with no offer of a badge if they shared their data with their final publication. The primary outcome was the data sharing rate. Badges did not noticeably motivate researchers who published in BMJ Open to share their data; the odds of awarding badges were nearly equal in the intervention and control groups (odds ratio = 0.9, 95% CI [0.1, 9.0]). Data sharing rates were low in both groups, with just two datasets shared in each of the intervention and control groups. The global movement towards open science has made significant gains with the development of numerous data sharing policies and tools. What remains to be established is an effective incentive that motivates researchers to take up such tools to share their data.