scite and Cambridge University Press Partner to Improve How Research Articles are Discovered and Evaluated Through Smart Citations | by scite | scite | Sep, 2020 | Medium

“scite, an award-winning platform for discovering and evaluating scientific articles, and Cambridge University Press (CUP), a leading academic publisher and the world’s oldest university press, have partnered to index CUP articles on scite.

The indexing partnership gives scite access to the full-text of all articles published by CUP, which it will use to create Smart Citations. Smart Citations show how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation and a classification describing whether it provides supporting or disputing evidence for the cited claim….”

A dataset describing data discovery and reuse practices in research | Scientific Data

Abstract:  This paper presents a dataset produced from the largest known survey examining how researchers and support professionals discover, make sense of and reuse secondary research data. 1677 respondents in 105 countries representing a variety of disciplinary domains, professional roles and stages in their academic careers completed the survey. The results represent the data needs, sources and strategies used to locate data, and the criteria employed in data evaluation of these respondents. The data detailed in this paper have the potential to be reused to inform the development of data discovery systems, data repositories, training activities and policies for a variety of general and specific user communities.

 

Introducing the PID Services Registry

“We are pleased to announce the launch of the new persistent identifier (PID) services registry available at https://pidservices.org, a new service to find services built upon different PIDs from core technology providers and those who integrate from across a variety of disciplinary areas. This is a combined effort across multiple organizations as part of the EC-funded FREYA project grant (777523) with the aim of furthering discoverability of PIDs and the services that are built upon them….”

NISO RP-19-2020, Open Discovery Initiative: Promoting Transparency in Discovery | NISO website

“NISO constituted a new Open Discovery Initiative Standing Committee following the approval of the ODI Recommended Practice. This standing committee has worked to facilitate the adoption of the principals of the Recommended Practice and to promote the adoption of conformance statements from discovery service providers and content providers. The committee has extended the work of the ODI Working Group by conducting additional surveys addressed to Content Providers, Discovery Service Providers, and to libraries to gather more extensive and recent data regarding the content discovery environment and to identify interest in enhancements to the Recommended Practice. Informed by these survey responses, the ODI Standing Committee has developed a revision to the Recommended Practice….”

You can publish open access, but ‘big’ journals still act as gatekeepers to discoverability and impact | Impact of Social Sciences

“Publishing trial data in big journals such as The Lancet and BMJ might make the data far more ‘discoverable’, and thus enhance the potential impact of publicly-funded research. There might therefore be value for researchers, policy-makers and the public in a publishing model that combines full open-access publication (a must for publicly-funded research, surely) with selective additional publication in certain, select, influential subscription journals (while being aware that ‘salami slicing’ publication strategies do not necessarily represent ‘good practice’). …”

You can publish open access, but ‘big’ journals still act as gatekeepers to discoverability and impact | Impact of Social Sciences

“Publishing trial data in big journals such as The Lancet and BMJ might make the data far more ‘discoverable’, and thus enhance the potential impact of publicly-funded research. There might therefore be value for researchers, policy-makers and the public in a publishing model that combines full open-access publication (a must for publicly-funded research, surely) with selective additional publication in certain, select, influential subscription journals (while being aware that ‘salami slicing’ publication strategies do not necessarily represent ‘good practice’). …”