Latest Article Alert from BMC Public Health

The latest articles from BMC Public Health, published between 22-Jun-2012 and 29-Jun-2012

For articles which have only just been published, you will see a ‘provisional PDF’ corresponding to the accepted manuscript.
A fully formatted PDF and full text (HTML) version will be made available soon.

Study protocol
Initiation of Methadone in primary care (ANRS-Methaville): a phase III randomized


Why the UK Should Not Heed the Finch Report

The UK?s universities and research funders have been leading the rest of the world in the movement toward Open Access (OA) to research with ?Green? OA mandates requiring researchers to self-archive their journal articles on the web, free for all. A report has emerged from the Finch committee that looks superficially as if it were supporting OA, but is strongly biased in favor of the interests of the publishing industry over the interests of UK research. Instead of recommending building on the UK?s lead in cost-free Green OA, the committee has recommended spending a great deal of extra money to pay publishers for ?Gold? OA publishing. If the Finch committee were heeded, the UK would lose both its lead in OA and a great deal of public money — and worldwide OA would be set back at least a decade.

Open Access means online access to peer-reviewed research, free for all. (Some OA advocates want more than this, but all want at least this.) Subscriptions restrict research access to users at institutions that can afford to subscribe to the journal in which the research was published. OA makes it accessible to all would-be users. This maximizes research uptake, usage, applications and progress, to the benefit of the tax-paying public that funds it.

There are two ways for authors to make their research OA. One way is to publish it in an OA journal, which makes it free online. This is called ?Gold OA.? There are currently about 25,000 peer-reviewed journals, across all disciplines, worldwide. Most of them (about 90%) are not Gold. Some Gold OA journals (mostly overseas national journals) cover their publication costs from subscriptions or subsidies, but the international Gold OA journals charge the author an often sizeable fee (£1000 or more).

The other way for authors to make their research OA is to publish it in the suitable journal of their choice, but to self-archive their peer-reviewed final draft in their institutional OA repository to make it free online for those who lack subscription access to the publisher?s version of record. This is called ?Green OA.?

The UK is the country that first began mandating (i.e., requiring) that its researchers provide Green OA. Only Green OA can be mandated, because Gold OA costs extra money and restricts authors? journal choice. But Gold OA can be recommended, where suitable, and funds can be offered to pay for it, if available.

The first Green OA mandate in the world was designed and adopted in the UK (University of Southampton School of Electronics and Computer Science, 2003) and the UK was the first nation in which all RCUK research funding councils have mandated Green OA. The UK already has 26 institutional mandates and 14 funder mandates, more than any other country except the US, which has 39 institutional mandates and 4 funder mandates — but the UK is far ahead of the US relative to its size (although the US and EU are catching up, following the UK?s lead).

To date, the world has a total of 185 institutional mandates and 52 funder mandates. This is still only a tiny fraction of the world?s total number of universities, research institutes and research funders. Universities and research institutions are the universal providers of all peer-reviewed research, funded and unfunded, across all disciplines, but even in the UK, far fewer than half of the universities have as yet mandated OA, and only a few of the UK?s OA mandates are designed to be optimally effective. Nevertheless, the current annual Green OA rate for the UK (40%) is twice the worldwide baseline rate (20%).

What is clearly needed now in the UK (and worldwide) is to increase the number of Green OA mandates by institutions and funders to 100% and to upgrade the sub-optimal mandates to ensure 100% compliance. This increase and upgrade is purely a matter of policy; it does not cost any extra money.

What is the situation for Gold OA? The latest estimate for worldwide Gold OA is 12%, but this includes the overseas national journals for which there is less international demand. Among the 10,000 journals indexed by Thomson-Reuters, about 8% are Gold. The percentage of Gold OA in the UK is half as high (4%) as in the rest of the world, almost certainly because of the cost and choice constraint of Gold OA and the fact that the UK?s 40% cost-free Green OA rate is double the global 20% baseline, because of the UK?s mandates.

Now we come to the heart of the matter. Publishers lobby against Green OA and Green OA mandates on the basis of two premises: (#1) that Green OA is inadequate for users? needs and (#2) that Green OA is parasitic, and will destroy both journal publishing and peer review if allowed to grow: If researchers, their funders and their institutions want OA, let them pay instead for Gold OA.

Both these arguments have been accepted, uncritically, by the Finch Committee, which, instead of recommending the cost-free increasing and upgrading of the UK?s Green OA mandates has instead recommended increasing public spending by £50-60 million yearly to pay for more Gold OA.

Let me close by looking at the logic and economics underlying this recommendation that publishers have welcomed so warmly: What seems to be overlooked is the fact that worldwide institutional subscriptions are currently paying the cost of journal publishing, including peer review, in full (and handsomely) for the 90% of journals that are non-OA today. Hence the publication costs of the Green OA that authors are providing today are fully paid for by the institutions worldwide that can afford to subscribe.

If publisher premise #1 — that Green OA is inadequate for users? needs — is correct, then when Green OA is scaled up to 100% it will continue to be inadequate, and the institutions that can afford to subscribe will continue to cover the cost of publication, and premise #2 is refuted: Green OA will not destroy publication or peer review.

Now suppose that premise #1 is wrong: Green OA (the author?s peer-reviewed final draft) proves adequate for all users? needs, so once the availability of Green OA approaches 100% for their users, institutions cancel their journals, making subscriptions no longer sustainable as the means of covering the costs of peer-reviewed journal publication.

What will journals do, as their subscription revenues shrink? They will do what all businesses do under those conditions: They will cut unnecessary costs. If the Green OA version is adequate for users, that means both the print edition and the online edition of the journal (and their costs) can be phased out, as there is no longer a market for them. Nor do journals have to do the access-provision or archiving of peer-reviewed drafts: that?s offloaded onto the distributed global network of Green OA institutional repositories. What?s left for peer-reviewed journals to do?

Peer review itself is done for publishers for free by researchers, just as their papers are provided to publishers for free by researchers. The journals manage the peer review, with qualified editors who select the peer reviewers and adjudicate the reviews. That costs money, but not nearly as much money as is bundled into journal publication costs, and hence subscription prices, today.

But if and when global Green OA ?destroys? the subscription base for journals as they are published today, forcing journals to cut obsolete costs and downsize to just peer-review service provision alone, Green OA will by the same token also have released the institutional subscription funds to pay the downsized journals? sole remaining publication cost ? peer review ? as a Gold OA publication fee, out of a fraction of the institutional windfall subscription savings. (And the editorial boards and authorships of those journal titles whose publishers are not interested in staying in the scaled down post-Green-OA publishing business will simply migrate to Gold OA publishers who are.)

So, far from leading to the destruction of journal publishing and peer review, scaling up Green OA mandates globally will generate, first, the 100% OA that research so much needs — and eventually also a transition to sustainable post-Green-OA Gold OA publishing.

But not if the Finch Report is heeded and the UK heads in the direction of squandering more scarce public money on funding pre-emptive Gold OA instead of extending and upgrading cost-free Green OA mandates.

Wiley Creates New Role to Lead Open Access

Wiley have created a new role to lead open access. Rachel Burley has been appointed to the position of Vice President and Director, Open Access. In this new role Rachel will lead all aspects of the growth and development of open access publishing at Wiley. Working with colleagues, societies, funders, and academic institutions, she will facilitate the identification of open access opportunities and lead the development of products, policy, technology, processes, sales, and marketing initiatives necessary to provide first class support to authors.

Over the past 18 months, Wiley has expanded the range of options available to authors seeking to publish their research findings in open access journals. OnlineOpen, Wiley’s hybrid open access option, has steadily expanded and Wiley Open Access, a series of fully open access journals, launched in early 2011. The Wiley Open Access portfolio includes eleven journals, with additional journals scheduled to launch later in the year.

These initiatives are enjoying significant uptake by authors, enabling Wiley to attract high quality research and develop new revenue streams to support publication. In addition, there is increasing interest among society partners, institutions, and funders who wish to investigate and support sustainable publishing options.

Rachel joined Wiley in 2007 as VP & Publisher for Current Protocols and subsequently assumed responsibility for a portfolio of life sciences journals. Prior to that, Rachel spent seven years with Nature Publishing Group in publishing and business development roles.

“Wiley is committed to expanding the open access options available to our authors and society partners in a sustainable manner that serves the scientific community,” said Rachel. “I am looking forward to working with our authors, partners, and colleagues to develop and deliver open access products which provide exceptional author service and high visibility of the published research.”

“As open access becomes increasingly important to authors and funders, we are exploring and developing options which will offer a wide range of sustainable publishing routes to suit all needs. Rachel’s new role will allow us to strengthen and grow our progress in this area,” said Steve Miron, Senior Vice President & Managing Director, Scientific, Technical, Medical, and Scholarly, Wiley.

Latest Article Alert from BMC Infectious Diseases

The latest articles from BMC Infectious Diseases, published between 29-May-2012 and 28-Jun-2012

For articles which have only just been published, you will see a ‘provisional PDF’ corresponding to the accepted manuscript.
A fully formatted PDF and full text (HTML) version will be made available soon.

Study protocol
Immediate versus conditional treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection –


Latest Article Alert from BMC Medical Research Methodology

The latest articles from BMC Medical Research Methodology, published between 29-May-2012 and 28-Jun-2012

For articles which have only just been published, you will see a ‘provisional PDF’ corresponding to the accepted manuscript.
A fully formatted PDF and full text (HTML) version will be made available soon.

Correspondence
The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness:


How Can we Help you and your OA Week Events?

So we know people are gearing up for their events this year. Please take a look at our resources and downloads available and let us know if you see anything missing or needing any particular updates. Do you need help with marketing materials? Advice on getting speakers? Do you have no clue how to start or are just overwhelmed? Get in touch with Michael Morris (mmorris [at] plus [dot] org) or Donna Okubo  (dokubo [at] plus [dot] org) at PLoS!

We are gearing up for another webcast soon, and will post those details as we get them.

Let’s get those OA Week plans in the works!

PLoS ONE launches the NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection

The following blog is by Babak Kateb, curator of the PLoS ONE NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection

One of the great challenges of the 21st century is how to translate scientific advancements from physical sciences into medicine. This gap of knowledge is also clearly visible amongst multiple disciplines within medicine (i.e. neurosurgery and radiology, neurology and neurosurgery, psychiatry and radiology and radiology and neurology). In this spirit, the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) has been successfully addressing this educational gap by bringing together physicians, surgeons, scientists and engineers from multiple disciplines to promote cross-disciplinary research and publication.

To foster increased dialogue between these communities, PLoS ONE has launched a special collection entitled SBMT NeuroMapping & Therapeutics. The SBMT encourages its members to publish their research in PLoS ONE. These articles will then be brought together into an ongoing Collection that will highlight this content.

The aim of the SBMT NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection is to provide a forum for interdisciplinary research aimed at translation of knowledge across a number of fields such as:

  • Neurosurgery (e.g. Image Guided Therapy/intervention, brain tumors and intraoperative navigation, nanoneurosurgery, stereotactic radiosurgery, minimally invasive therapy, vascular neurosurgery, functional neurosurgery…)
  • Neurology (e.g. movement disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, neurooncology, as well as image guided device implantation…)
  • Psychiatry (e.g. medical imaging for psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia, depression, PTSD…)
  • Radiology (e.g. fMRI, PET, Nuclear medicine, MR SPEC, MRI, MR-PET, DTI, CT-PET, Focused Ultrasound, SQUID MRI, low magnet MRI…)
  • Neuroscience (e.g. stem cell, molecular neuroscience, image guided mapping of genes, proteomics, genomics…)
  • Neuroengineering (e.g. iomaterial & tissue engineering, human brain Machine Interface, brain and spinal cord devices, nanomedicine, extraterrestrial/space medicine & clinical practice…)
  • Policy (e.g. healthcare policy issues that affect the treatment delivery and usage of certain devices/drugs/imaging technologies…)

This Collection will contain a selection of those articles published within PLoS ONE, which the Editorial Board of the Collection feel are representative of the aims and scope of the SBMT society.  It will continue to expand over time as the number of relevant articles grows and are added to the Collection.

The SBMT welcomes submissions to the PLoS ONE NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection. If you wish to submit your research please consider the following when preparing your manuscript:

  • Submission to PLoS ONE as part of the NMT Collection does not guarantee publication or inclusion into the final Collection due to highly competitive nature of this collection.

When you are ready to submit your manuscript to the collection, please log in to the PLoS ONE manuscript submission system and select the ‘SBMT NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection’ from the dropdown menu to ensure the PLoS ONE staff are aware of your submission.

Please contact Sam Moore (smoore@plos.org) if you would like further information about how to submit your research to the PLoS ONE NeuroMapping & Therapeutics Collection.

The following PLoS ONE Editorial Board members have agreed to assist with this collection:

  • Dr. Krystof Bankiewicz, University of California at San Francisco, US
  • Dr. Mitch Berger, University of California at San Francisco, US
  • Dr. Keith Black, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, US
  • Dr. Aria Tzika, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, US
  • Dr. Michael Lim, Johns Hopkins Hospital, US
  • Dr. Antoni Rodriguez-Fornells, University of Barcelona, Spain
  • Dr. Shawn Hochman, Emory University, US
  • Dr. Stephen Ginsberg, Nathan Kline Institute and New York University School of Medicine, US
  • Dr. Andreas Meisel, Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  • Dr. Hitoshi Okazawa, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Japan
  • Dr. Joseph El Khoury, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, US
  • Dr. Karin Peterson, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – Rocky Mountain Laboratories, US
  • Dr. Tsuneya Ikezu, Boston University School of Medicine, US
  • Dr. Mike Chen, City of Hope, US
  • Dr. Christopher Wheeler, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, US
  • Dr. Maya Koronyo-Hamaoui, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, US
  • Dr. Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, Johns Hopkins Hospital, US

 

Curators: Babak Kateb and Allyson C. Rosen

The third issue of ChemistryOpen is now available online!

ChemistryOpenIssue 3 of ChemistyOpen is now available via Wiley Online Library  and the journal’s homepage: www.chemistryopen.org.  This issue covers a great range of current hot topics in chemistry. While Albericio et al. optimize reactivity and stability of active esters for peptide bond formation, the Communication by Córdova et al. deals with a highly enantioselective, metal-free cascade reaction for an efficient entry to pyrazolidine derivatives. König et al. apply visible light to a modified Meerwein arylation and thereby improve its yield and together with Reiser et al. report on zinc(II)-cyclen complexes immobilized on magnetic nanobeads that allow a quantitative reversible extraction of riboflavin. In a second contribution to ChemistryOpen this year, Larhed et al. exploit the scope of aryltrifluoroborates for palladium(II)-catalyzed coupling with olefins.

All articles published in ChemistryOpen are fully open access and freely available to all. Click here  to browse the latest issue!

Latest Article Alert from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology

The latest articles from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, published between 11-Jun-2012 and 25-Jun-2012

For articles which have only just been published, you will see a ‘provisional PDF’ corresponding to the accepted manuscript.
A fully formatted PDF and full text (HTML) version will be made available soon.

Research
Assessment of the Influence of Whole Body Vibration on Cochlear


Latest Article Alert from Breast Cancer Research

The latest articles from Breast Cancer Research, published between 11-Jun-2012 and 25-Jun-2012

For research articles that have only just been published you will see a ‘provisional PDF’ corresponding to the accepted manuscript. Fully formatted PDF and full-text (HTML) versions will be made available soon.

Review
Challenges and opportunities in the targeting of fibroblast growth factor receptors