Speeding Up the Dissemination of Scholarly Information  | Ithaka S+R

“The concept of scholarly record is broadening. There is an increasing emphasis on sharing various outputs from the initial investigation to the final dissemination stage. Understanding how ideas evolve into knowledge in a systematic and timely manner is critically important as we promote  replicability and transparency. The COVID-19 pandemic has further underscored the importance of speedy sharing of research results. It accentuated the role of preprints in sharing results with speed, but also compounded the questions about accuracy, misconduct, and our reliance on the “self-correcting” nature of the scientific enterprise. As scientists and health care professionals, as well as the general public, look for information about the pandemic, preprint services are growing in importance. I hope that this brief will lead to further reflections on such critical questions….”

Clinical and Technical Considerations of an Open Access Telehealth Network in South Carolina: Definition and Deployment – PubMed

Abstract:  Background: Today, telehealth is experiencing exponential growth in utilization. Paralleling this trend is the growth in the telehealth industry, with sharp increases in the number of platforms, functionalities, and levels of integrations within both the electronic health record and other technical systems supporting health care. When a telehealth network is intended to be used across independent health care systems, an additional layer of complexity emerges. In the context of regionalized telehealth networks that are not within the same health care system, not only are technical interoperability challenges a practical barrier, but administrative, clinical, and competitive elements also quickly emerge, resulting in fragmented, siloed technologies.

Objective: The study aimed to describe a statewide approach to deploying an interoperable open access telehealth network across multiple health systems.

Methods: One promising solution to the abovementioned concerns is an open access telehealth network. In the field of telehealth, an open access network (OAN) can be defined as a network infrastructure that can be used by health care providers without a closed or proprietary platform, specific obligatory network, or service-specific telehealth technologies. This framework for the development of an OAN is grounded in practical examples of clinical programs that function in each stage of network maturity based on the experience of the South Carolina Telehealth Alliance (SCTA). The SCTA’s experience details successes and challenges in an ongoing effort to achieve an OAN. The model describes an OAN in stages of collaborative maturity and provides insights into the technological, clinical, and administrative implications of making the collaboration possible.

Results: The four stages of an OAN are defined according to operational maturity, ranging from feasibility to demonstration of implementation. Each stage is associated with infrastructure and resource requirements and technical and clinical activities. In stage 1, technical standards are agreed upon, and the clinical programs are designed to utilize compliant technologies. In stage 2, collaboration is demonstrated through technical teams working together to address barriers, whereas clinical and administrative teams share best practices. In stage 3, a functional interoperable network is demonstrated with different institutions providing service through common telehealth end points at different patient care sites. In stage 4, clinical workflows are streamlined and standardized across institutions, and economies of scale are achieved through technical and administrative innovations.

Conclusions: The approach to OAN development described provides a roadmap for achieving a functional telehealth network across independent health systems. The South Carolina experience reveals both successes and challenges in achieving this goal. The next steps toward the development of OANs include advocacy and ongoing engagement with the developers of telehealth technologies regarding their commitment to interoperability.

Toward Easy Deposit: Lowering the Barriers of Green Open Access with Data Integration and Automation

Abstract:  This article describes the design and development of an interoperable application that supports green open access with long-term sustainability and improved user experience of article deposit. The lack of library resources and the unfriendly repository user interface are two significant barriers that hinder green open access. Tasked to implement the open access mandate, librarians at an American research university developed a comprehensive system called Easy Deposit 2 to automate the support workflow of green open access. Easy Deposit 2 is a web application that is able to harvest new publications, to source manuscripts on behalf of the library, and to facilitate self-archiving to a university’s institutional repository. The article deposit rate increased from 7.40% to 25.60% with the launch of Easy Deposit 2. The results show that a computer system can implement routine tasks to support green open access with success. Recent developments in digital repository provide new opportunities for innovation, such as Easy Deposit 2, in supporting open access. Academic librarians are vital in promoting “openness” in scholarly communication, such as transparency and diversity in the sharing of publication data.

 

Marking Open and Affordable Courses: Best Practices and Case Studies – Simple Book Publishing

“This collaboratively authored guide helps institutions navigate the uncharted waters of tagging course material as open educational resources (OER) or under a low-cost threshold by summarizing relevant state legislation, providing tips for working with stakeholders, and analyzing technological and process considerations. The first half of the book provides high-level analysis of the technology, legislation, and cultural change needed to operationalize course markings. The second half features case studies by Alexis Clifton, Rebel Cummings-Sauls, Michael Daly, Juville Dario-Becker, Tony DeFranco, Cindy Domaika, Ann Fiddler, Andrea Gillaspy Steinhilper, Rajiv Jhangiani, Brian Lindshield, Andrew McKinney, Nathan Smith, and Heather White.”

2020 SSP Webinar: The Future of Preprints: Coronavirus as a Case Study

“In 2020 the development of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge in related preprints as researchers around the world use them to share research quickly and work together to fight the pandemic. More researchers are posting preprints in more disciplines than ever before, and this growth is prompting conversations about the future of preprints. What are the benefits of sharing early stage research? What are the risks, and are there ways to mitigate them? Are preprints here to stay, or are they a passing fad?

This panel will use COVID-19 preprints as a case study, within which to explore the benefits and risks of preprints and to provide projections on their future….”

Introducing CiteScore, Our Journal’s Preferred Citation Index: Moving Beyond the Impact Factor – Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

“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.”

A Workflow for Open Peer Review: Case Study UCL Press – ScienceOpen Blog

“Peer review is a key element of scholarly publishing, but for the past decade the research community has struggled to move beyond the black box and develop new open models of research evaluation. University College London and UCL Press would like to change that. Since the beginning, ScienceOpen has been committed to open peer review – now offering post-publication review options for over 62 million articles and preprints. So, with the vision of a university-led publishing platform based on open review principles, UCL Press teamed up with ScienceOpen to create the journal “UCL Open: Environment”. …”

2020 Update of the University Open Access Publication Fund

“We are fortunate in our campus’s commitment to open access publishing. The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee is the only institution offering such funding in the state. The University of Wisconsin-Madison closed its fund in 2014 after spending its initial $50,000 seed money. For comparison of levels of open access initiatives at other universities, we reviewed 15 UWM peeruniversities and found that only three offer such funds: Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Temple University, and University of Illinois at Chicago. From our survey of their fund coordinators, we learned that only one fund (allocated annually at $20,000) was supported entirely from the library’s budget; and the two other funds included a partial contribution (one at $15,000) from the library’s budget along with money ($50,000-60,000 total per year) collected from schools, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, and the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research. In writing this report (April 2020) we checked back on the status of OA funds at the three peer institutions and discovered that two were not currently active, either exhausted or being evaluated until the next fiscal year. After our survey of peer institutions in 2018, we added the UWM UOAP to two directories: Open Access Funds in Action hosted by SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition)1 and Open Access Directory hosted by the School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College2 ….”

Web Accessibility in the Institutional Repository: Crafting User-Centered Submission Policies

“As web accessibility initiatives increase across institutions, it is important not only to reframe and rethink policies, but also to develop sustainable and tenable methods for enforcing accessibility efforts. For institutional repositories, it is imperative to determine the extent to which both the repository manager and the user are responsible for depositing accessible content. This presentation allows us to share our accessibility framework and help repository and content managers craft sustainable, long-term goals for accessible content in institutional repositories, while also providing openly available resources for short-term benefit.

Indiana University’s institutional repository, IUScholarWorks, audited the accessibility of its existing content and created policies to encourage accessible submissions. No established workflows considering accessibility existed when this audit took place, and no additional resources were allocated to facilitate this shift in focus. As a result, the Scholarly Communication team altered the repository submission workflow to encourage authors to make their finished documents accessible with limited intervention.

We identified a spectrum of accessibility services, ranging from applying nascent accessibility practices to implementing long term solutions. When initiating new policies, responsibility for accessibility will often fall more heavily upon the user, while ideal practices aim to be more collaborative in nature. Initially, instead of concentrating resources on retroactively deleting non-accessible content, we focused on our submission process, which we believe emphasizes the importance of depositing accessible documents. We created guidelines that allow users to add basic accessibility improvements without needing to significantly restructure or rewrite their document. Our guidelines provide “quick fixes” that authors can easily implement to their finished documents prior to submission, including adding structural tags and alt text, clearly labeling lists, and identifying document language. Moving forward, we aim to implement ideal accessibility standards for deposited work, regardless of format or origin.”

Web Accessibility in the Institutional Repository: Crafting User-Centered Submission Policies

“As web accessibility initiatives increase across institutions, it is important not only to reframe and rethink policies, but also to develop sustainable and tenable methods for enforcing accessibility efforts. For institutional repositories, it is imperative to determine the extent to which both the repository manager and the user are responsible for depositing accessible content. This presentation allows us to share our accessibility framework and help repository and content managers craft sustainable, long-term goals for accessible content in institutional repositories, while also providing openly available resources for short-term benefit.

Indiana University’s institutional repository, IUScholarWorks, audited the accessibility of its existing content and created policies to encourage accessible submissions. No established workflows considering accessibility existed when this audit took place, and no additional resources were allocated to facilitate this shift in focus. As a result, the Scholarly Communication team altered the repository submission workflow to encourage authors to make their finished documents accessible with limited intervention.

We identified a spectrum of accessibility services, ranging from applying nascent accessibility practices to implementing long term solutions. When initiating new policies, responsibility for accessibility will often fall more heavily upon the user, while ideal practices aim to be more collaborative in nature. Initially, instead of concentrating resources on retroactively deleting non-accessible content, we focused on our submission process, which we believe emphasizes the importance of depositing accessible documents. We created guidelines that allow users to add basic accessibility improvements without needing to significantly restructure or rewrite their document. Our guidelines provide “quick fixes” that authors can easily implement to their finished documents prior to submission, including adding structural tags and alt text, clearly labeling lists, and identifying document language. Moving forward, we aim to implement ideal accessibility standards for deposited work, regardless of format or origin.”