NGOs’ experiences of navigating the open… | F1000Research

Abstract:  Grant-led consortia working in the global development sector rely on the input of local and national non-government organisations in low- and middle-income countries. However, the open access mandates and mechanisms embedded within grants and promoted by funders and publishers are designed almost exclusively with large universities and research institutions in mind. Experiences from the consortium of health research non-government organisations comprising the Communicable Diseases Health Service Delivery research programme show that implementing open access mandates is not as simple or frictionless as it initially appears.

 

NGOs’ experiences of navigating the open… | F1000Research

Abstract:  Grant-led consortia working in the global development sector rely on the input of local and national non-government organisations in low- and middle-income countries. However, the open access mandates and mechanisms embedded within grants and promoted by funders and publishers are designed almost exclusively with large universities and research institutions in mind. Experiences from the consortium of health research non-government organisations comprising the Communicable Diseases Health Service Delivery research programme show that implementing open access mandates is not as simple or frictionless as it initially appears.

 

US GAO Recommends Actions to Improve Public Access to Research Results – Association of Research Libraries

“The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released its study, Additional Actions Needed to Improve Public Access to Research Results. The report examines the extent of US agencies’ progress implementing plans to increase public access to federally funded research results (both publications and data), per the 2013 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memo directing the development of such plans. The report contains a review of progress across 16 agencies, and issues 37 recommendations for executive action at both the individual agency and interagency level, in such areas as repository development or guidance, requirements for data management plans (DMPs), and compliance checking.

Next month, at the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) “Implementing Effective Data Practices” conference, participants—research officers, librarians, tool-builders, and others in the research community—will hear from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Department of Energy (DOE), and private funding agencies on these issues, including data management plans, repositories, and compliance. ARL is committed to working with the Association of American Universities (AAU) and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) on recommendations for intra-institutional workflows and guidelines, and to partnering with the agencies to make publicly funded research outputs findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable….”

Public Access to NIST Research | NIST

“NIST is committed to the idea that results of federally funded research are a valuable national resource and a strategic asset.  To the extent feasible and consistent with law, agency mission, resource constraints, and U.S. national, homeland, and economic security, NIST will promote the deposit of scientific data arising from unclassified research and programs, funded wholly or in part by NIST, except for Standard Reference Data, free of charge in publicly accessible databases.  Subject to the same conditions and constraints listed above, NIST also intends to make freely available to the public, in publicly accessible repositories, all peer-reviewed scholarly publications arising from unclassified research and programs funded wholly or in part by NIST. 

 

NIST publications can be located through the NIST website.  Peer-reviewed papers are deposited in PMC.  NIST Technical Series and publications that are not peer reviewed are available through govinfo.  Papers can also be located through science.gov along with other government papers.  NIST data can be located through the Science Data Portal on the NIST website and through data.gov, along with other government data.  Links to repositories containing NIST code, data, and publications are provided to the right.

 

NIST has established an embargo period of no more than 12 months post-publication for making peer-reviewed publications freely available through NIST’s repository on PMC.  Stakeholders may petition NIST’s Open Access Officer to change the embargo period in the following year for publications in a specified scientific field.  A petition must demonstrate that the existing embargo period for certain fields of scientific research does not provide a public benefit and is inconsistent with the objectives articulated in the OSTP Memo.  When considering changes to the embargo period, NIST will consult with other agencies that fund related areas of scientific research.”

U.S. GAO – FEDERAL RESEARCH: Additional Actions Needed to Improve Public Access to Research Results

“Public access to the results of federally funded research can accelerate scientific breakthroughs. In 2013, certain federal agencies were directed to create plans for increasing access to publications and data they funded.

The 19 agencies we reviewed made progress, but some have not fully implemented their plans. For example:

7 agencies have not taken steps to make data findable, such as creating a single web access point

4 don’t require all researchers to submit a plan to provide access to data

11 don’t fully ensure that researchers comply with access requirements

We made 37 recommendations to 16 agencies to address these and other issues….”

Scholarly Communication: From Understanding to Engagement | Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL)

“Academic and research librarians increasingly recognize scholarly communication as a core competency of the profession. Whether helping researchers meet their funder’s mandates for public access and data sharing, guiding responsible copyright practice, or supporting new types of scholarship and instruction, librarians are leading change across campus and around the world. With this workshop, ACRL empowers our community in accelerating the transformation of the scholarly communication system.

This workshop has been updated with a series of targeted modules that reflect the most exciting and pressing issues in the field today. The goal of the structured, interactive program is to equip participants with knowledge and skills to help accelerate the transformation of the scholarly communication system.

You can bring this workshop at full cost to your campus year round. Additionally, ACRL offers a partial subsidy on a competitive basis for up to five hosts each academic year. The deadline to apply to host the subsidized version in 2020 is Friday, November 15, 2019. View more information about the subsidized program….”

Data sharing from clinical trials: lessons from the YODA Project – STAT

“This week, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine are convening the workshop “Sharing Clinical Trial Data: Challenges and a Way Forward” just shy of five years after the Institute of Medicine released its seminal report, “Sharing Clinical Trial Data: Maximizing Benefits, Minimizing Risk.”

During this time, the scientific culture regarding data sharing has shifted. Just last week, the National Institutes of Health requested public comments on its draft “Policy for Data Management and Sharing.” In 2018, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors began requiring data-sharing plans for clinical trials as a condition for publication in member journals. And platforms such as ClinicalStudyDataRequest.com, Project Data Sphere, and BioLINCC have emerged or grown. These platforms use a variety of different governance structures and models for data access, developed both with and without the support of industry or government….

The Yale Open Data Access (YODA) Project, which two of us (J.S.R. and H.M.K.) co-direct, launched in 2011 and formed a partnership with Johnson & Johnson in 2014. This five-year partnership offers an opportunity to reflect on some of the questions about sharing clinical trial data that may inform ongoing and future efforts….”

NIH Requests Public Comment on a Draft Policy for Data Management and Sharing and Supplemental Draft Guidance | SEA Currents

“Yesterday, NIH released a Draft NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing and supplemental draft guidance for public comment. The purpose of this draft policy and supplemental draft guidance is to promote effective and efficient data management and sharing that furthers NIH’s commitment to making the results and accomplishments of the research it funds and conducts available to the public. Complete information about the draft Policy and draft supplemental guidance can be found on the NIH OSP website.

Stakeholder feedback is essential to ensure that any future policy maximizes responsible data sharing, minimizes burden on researchers, and protects the privacy of research participants.  Stakeholders are invited to comment on any aspect of the draft policy, the supplemental draft guidance, or any other considerations relevant to NIH’s data management and sharing policy efforts that NIH should consider.

To facilitate commenting, NIH has established a web portal that can be accessed here. To ensure consideration, comments must be received no later than January 10, 2020….”

Repositories for academic products/outputs: Latin… | F1000Research

Abstract:  Open access policies have been progressing since the beginning of this century. Important global initiatives, both public and private, have set the tone for what we understand by open access. The emergence of tools and web platforms for open access (both legal and illegal) have placed the focus of the discussion on open access to knowledge, both for academics and for the general public, who finance such research through their taxes, particularly in Latin America. This historically unnoticed discussion must, we believe, be discussed publicly, given the characteristics of the Latin American scientific community, as well as its funding sources. This article includes an overview of what is meant by open access and describes the origins of the term, both in its philosophical sense and in its practical sense, expressed in the global declarations of Berlin and Bethesda. It also includes the notion of open access managed (or not) by some reputable institutions in Chile, such as CONICYT (National Commission for Scientific and Technological Research) and higher education institutions reputed nationally, such as the Universdad de Chile and Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Various Latin American initiatives related to open access (Scielo, Redalyc, among others) are described, as well as the presence of Chilean documents in those platforms. The national institutional repositories are listed, as well as their current status and a discussion about what open access has implied in Latin America and its importance for the replicability of the investigations carried out locally. Finally, we describe some governmental initiatives (mainly legislative) at the Latin American level and propose some recommendations regarding the promotion and implementation of repositories for the access to scientific data (for access and replication purposes) of the national research.

 

Guest Post – Transparency: What Can One Learn from a Trove of Invoices? – The Scholarly Kitchen

“The dataset Ashley [Farley] provided us [from the Gates Foundation] (covering the period from August 1, 2016, to March 31, 2019) includes:

3,268 invoices for articles in peer-reviewed journals
720 journals
90 publishers

In total the Foundation paid $9,002,225 to these publishers to ensure results of all Foundation research was disseminated with a CC BY license with no embargos — an average cost for “open” of $2,755 per article.

We think we’ve uncovered some interesting trends in this data, but our main objective is to share the research dataset we have developed, along with the Foundation’s original invoicing data. That way anyone can use these for further research….

In 2016, only 22% of authors were choosing to publish in fully-OA journals; in 2019, 50% have done so….

Traditional publishers charge significantly more for APCs than OA-only publishers….

Researchers choosing to publish in a fully OA Journal show a strong preference for OA-only publishers’ titles….

There are no significant differences in for-profit vs. non-profit publishers’ APCs for fully OA journals….”