Thursday, January 22, 2015

Why principal investigators funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health publish in the Public Library of Science journals


 

Posted: 21 Jan 2015 06:18 AM PST
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 02:51 AM PST
"That's a pretty specific title, I suspect, but as I am learning with the Open Library of Humanities, we're in uncharted territory, a place where the specifics matter. This post should not be considered legal or accounting advice. I'm not qualified to give it. I post this as a series of matters that we are working through, with advice from our accountants, in case anyone else is trying a similar enterprise and wants to know what the landscape looks like. As a brief background: The Open Library of Humanities (OLH) is a gold open access, peer-reviewed, internationally-supported, academic-led, not-for-profit, mega-journal, multi-journal and books platform for the humanities. It is funded by an international library consortium and so has no author-facing charges ... All well and good. Now, here's where it gets complicated and we begin to delve into tax law. We are a not-for-profit entity: a UK company limited by guarantee. We work with a technological supplier who must charge us VAT on supplies. We have 'agents' in countries abroad who act as billing intermediaries. In short: we want to take money from libraries worldwide and make the products of the labour for which they pay available to everyone.  Let's consider what this looks like in a couple of different scenarios. If we were a traditional publisher, where you, as a UK library, were paying us for the 'direct and immediate' supply of a product to your collection, we would charge you VAT at a rate of 20%. We would, in addition, be able to claim back VAT on our expenditure to our supplier. The same applies to open-access publishing done through Article Processing Charges (APCs). If we were a for-profit academic publisher in this same environment, we would have to pay UK corporation tax.  But we are not like that. We are neither for-profit, nor, potentially, are we selling something back exclusively to participating libraries as a 'direct and immediate' benefit. After all, everyone gets access. There is potential, therefore, for our activities to be classified as 'non-business' activities. This means that we would not need to charge UK- and EU- based customers VAT. By contrast, though, it also means that we could not claim back VAT on our expenditure. If we didn't raise prices, therefore, this would entail a 20% hit to our revenue vs expenditure.  There is a further VAT complication, apparently. If, as an entity, we are contracting services from providers outside the UK (like a billing agent) that would be VATable in the UK, and this pushes us over the VAT threshold, then that expenditure may count as though it should be VATable. Yes, you read that right. We might have to pay VAT on something we were purchasing as though we'd received it as income. This is supposed to be in order to equalize competition between UK and external corporate entities. In reality, nobody in the UK can provide the specific services we need and it could prove to be a VAT headache ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 02:46 AM PST
"An immense number of U.S. government agencies play a central role in the collection of a wide array of public data — vital statistics on health, transportation, commerce, finance, agriculture, and more. Much of this information is gathered by the 13 principal statistical agencies, but smaller organizations — for example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Army Corps of Engineers and USAID — also gather important information. All this data gathering isn't inexpensive — the 13 agencies spend an estimated $3.7 billion annually on collection, processing and dissemination — but the benefits far outweigh the costs: In a 2014 report, the Commerce Department estimates that this information adds as much as $221 billion to the U.S. economy. Even better, journalists can use this wealth of data to deepen and broaden their reporting, anchoring it in facts and figures that can better inform their communities and the decisions they make. Below are links to data sources and tools from a broad range of federal agencies, courtesy of Katherine R. Smith, executive director of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS). This post is part of our ongoing dataset digest series, which highlights important information sources for journalists. If you know of other hidden datasets that deserve wider exposure, please email or ping us on Twitter ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 02:44 AM PST
" ... This is the same situation faced by another cardiac patient named Hugo Campos. In this TEDx talk, he talks about how he—an obsessive quantifier of his life's habits—lacks the ability to know what the machine inside his chest is seeing and doing. Although Hugo, like all of us, has technology available in his phone and other consumer devices to track how much he eats, drinks, sleeps, and exercises, he can't do the same thing with the device that keeps his heart going.  There's a host of reasons why this is the case. Manufacturers are tight-lipped about giving people access to the data and to the machines that would let them get that data. They raise questions about competitors accessing their proprietary systems. They sometimes mention security reasons (though a number of researchers say that the existing security is poor—a real problem if attackers can access what the patients can't). And, since we've seen it abused so often before, there's the question of copyright, and the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ... Though the factual data itself being sent from the device to the base station (and from there to the monitoring service) shouldn't be covered by copyright, the software running on the implants, in the base station, and in the machines at the monitoring service's and doctors' offices likely is. Getting around any access control measures to access that copyrighted software potentially violates the DMCA. We've seen device makers trying to use the DMCA to keep people fromunlocking their phones, turning their videogame consoles into more general-purpose computers, or even using generic printer toner cartridges.  So naturally, Hugo and others are worried that the same overbroad law might stand in the way of them getting at the critical data that's being generated by his heart, beat by beat, stored in the devices in his body and in his home, and using it in realtime to adjust his life to keep his heart on an even keel ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 02:19 AM PST
"Our updated downloadable Make it Digital resource, Copyright terms and the public domain in New Zealand, provides an easy reference guide for anyone wanting to know what was out of copyright in New Zealand as of 1 January 2015. The aim is to update this annually as further content enters the public domain or as legislation changes ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:52 AM PST
"The National Research Foundation (NRF) was established through the National Research Foundation Act (Act No.23 of 1998). As an independent statutory agency, the organisation promotes and supports research in South Africa largely through the country's Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), National Research Facilities and Science Councils with a view to generating knowledge and promoting high-level research capacity within the National System of Innovation (NSI). Supporting scientific research through public funding is important for growing the knowledge economy, promoting innovation and stimulating appropriate development. The publication of NRF-funded research outputs contributes to the knowledgebase of the country ... The NRF recognises the importance of Open Access to science and research while at the same time appreciating that Open Access will continue to evolve in response to societal needs, achieving overarching policy harmonisation and new innovative publishing business models.  From 01 March 2015, authors of research papers generated from research either fully or partially funded by NRF, when submitting and publishing in academic journals, should deposit their final peer-reviewed manuscripts that have been accepted by the journals, to the administering Institution Repository with an embargo period of no more than 12 months. Earlier Open Access may be provided should this be allowed by the publisher. If the paper is published in an Open Access journal or the publisher allows the deposit of the published version in PDF format, such version should be deposited into the administering Institutional Repository and Open Access should be provided as soon as possible.  In addition, the data supporting the publication should be deposited in an accredited Open Access repository, with the provision of a Digital Object Identifier for future citation and referencing ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:24 AM PST
"A recurring concern from some researchers about open access is the cost to authors. This is an area of persistent misconceptions and a lot of fear. It's a legitimate question of whether article processing charges create a Matthew effect, with labs with grants gaining an unfair advantage over those without grants. Or, worse, shutting out contributors entirely. This interests me, because by most standards, I am a scientific "have not." And yet, I've published many of my articles open access for some years now. I did not have stand alone research grants in that time. How did I do it? It's a mix. The most common situation was that the journal did not levy an article processing charge. In other words, these papers were free to me ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:22 AM PST
"The Austrian Science Fund (FWF), the Austrian Academic Consortium (Kooperation E-Medien Österreich, KEMÖ), and Taylor & Francis Group have today announced a two year pilot which will offset article publishing charges paid by the Austrian Science Fund against subscription costs for KEMÖ members. This offset amount will be used by the Austrian Academic Consortium members to reduce the costs of their new or existing subscriptions. In so doing, the agreement allows Taylor & Francis Group to fully acknowledge the funding provided by FWF for researchers to publish on an open access basis in the hybrid journals that make up Taylor & Francis Group's Open Select program ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:19 AM PST
"The Swedish Research Council has been tasked by the Government to produce national guidelines for open access to scientific information. The proposed guidelines are now handed in to the government. They are also available at SRC's website. The basic principles in the proposed national guidelines are that scientific publications and artistic works, as well as research data forming the basis for scientific publications, that are the result of publicly funded research must be openly available. In both cases, proposals for time frames for implementation are indicated ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:12 AM PST
"It brings us great pleasure to announce that the DuraSpace Board of Directors has chosen Debra Hanken Kurtz to serve as the new CEO for the Organization.  Kurtz is currently the Executive Director of the Texas Digital Library.  She will begin in her new role on February 16, 2015 and establish an office in Austin, Texas to manage DuraSpace business operations. Kurtz brings key relevant experience and skills to DuraSpace. As Executive Director of the Texas Digital Library, she managed and grew membership, operations, and services. She participates in working and planning groups for DPN and SHARE. At both Duke University and UNC Chapel Hill Libraries, Kurtz provided leadership and direction for digital collections, public websites, and early planning efforts for both libraries' institutional repositories. She was an active partner within the Triangle Research Libraries Network and has been a voice for Kuali OLE, an open-source integrated library system built by and for academic and research libraries. Kurtz's complete background can be found on linkedin. The DuraSpace team and Board of Directors is enthusiastic about working with Kurtz and establishing the strategic direction for DuraSpace over the coming years in the rapidly evolving landscape of digital research and scholarship. Leveraging open source technology development to advance our communities' goals and objectives will continue to be a focus for the DuraSpace organization. All member organizations will have an opportunity to meet and talk with Kurtz at the upcoming DuraSpace Membership Summit in Washington DC on March 11-12. Meeting invitations and details will be sent out later this week to all member organizations ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:10 AM PST
"Accessible open data about government spending and services remains a pipe dream across most of the world, an 86-country survey by the World Wide Web Foundation has found. The second edition of the Open Data Barometer, which came out on Tuesday, showed that fewer than 8 percent of surveyed countries publish datasets on things like government budgets, spending and contracts, and on the ownership of companies, in bulk machine-readable formats and under open re-use licenses.  This is particularly disappointing as both the G7 and G20 groups of countries have said they will try to create more governmental transparency by providing open data that anyone can crunch and build new businesses upon. Globally, the report states that 'the trend is towards steady, but not outstanding, growth in open data readiness and implementation.'  According to web inventor and Foundation founder Tim Berners-Lee: 'The G7 and G20 blazed a trail when they recognised open data as a crucial tool to strengthen transparency and fight corruption. Now they need to keep their promises to make critical areas like government spending and contracts open by default. The unfair practice of charging citizens to access public information collected with their tax resources must cease.' ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:07 AM PST
"In growing numbers, scholars are moving their workflows online. As that happens, important, once-invisible parts of the scientific process--conversations, arguments, recommendations, reads, bookmarks, and more--are leaving online traces. Mining these traces or "altmetrics" can give us faster, more diverse, and more accurate data of scholarly impact. Heather and Jason will discuss some current research on altmetrics, as well as some of its long-term implications: the potential to power a fast, open, and truly web-native scholarly communication ecosystem in which scientometrics plays an increasingly central role. They will also discuss ImpactStory, an open-source tool for gathering and presenting altmetrics ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 01:02 AM PST
[From Google's English] "Open Access, free for the reader publishing scientific articles, was only the beginning. In the future, further scientific data be made ​​public. This was one of the thoughts of the conference "Academic Publishing in Europe" (APE) , representatives of academic publishers, libraries, and researchers lured to Berlin. For the tenth time has Arnoud de Kemp organized the conference, this time under the motto 'Web25: The Road Ahead. Exploring the Future of Scholarly Communication & Academic Publishing'. At the beginning declared Barbara Schneider-Kempf , Director General of the Berlin State Library , its strategy: Where permitted by copyright, are to be digitized and made ​​for each users worldwide accessible as much information as possible. Martin Grötschel , President of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences went to his radical approach even one step further: 'I wish that all scientific publications free available electronically in the future, linked to each other and are searchable.' Then the maximum openness has been reached. Grotschel: 'Openness is the best way to promote scientific research.' Nor is it the proposal is visions of the future. What the European Commission plans in the near future, presented Celina Ramjoué ago by the Directorate-General for Communication Networks, content and technology: "We are moving from open access Open Science. Not only the scientific article should be publicly available, but also additional material as the researched data. 'The challenges in the implementation of thrust are including the electronic infrastructure, data standards and open source ...'"
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 12:57 AM PST
"Johnson & Johnson has agreed to release detailed clinical trial data on its medical devices and diagnostic tests to outside researchers through a collaboration with Yale University, making it the first large device manufacturer to systematically such data public. The announcement came the same day the Institute of Medicine, of the National Academy of Sciences, urged all clinical trial sponsors to share detailed study data with outside researchers and recommended the information be made available within 30 days of a product's approval. Medtronic Inc. previously had allowed Yale to evaluate data on a controversial spinal treatment, but the Yale University Open Data Access (YODA) Project agreement with JNJ is the first time a device manufacturer has made data available in a systematic way. Johnson & Johnson agreed last year to work with Yale to share data about its drugs, and added devices and diagnostics to the agreement to deepen its commitment, JNJ Chief Medical Officer Dr. Joanne Waldstreicher told The New YorkTimes. 'We really believe that to advance science and to advance medical care, we wanted to take the next step,' she said. The YODA Project will act as a bridge between investigators and JNJ's pharmaceutical and device and diagnostics businesses. Under the arrangement, the YODA Project will approve or deny requests from investigators for de-identified patient data associated with the pharmaceutical, medical device, and diagnostic clinical trials conducted by Johnson & Johnson companies ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 12:51 AM PST
"The recent merger news about Macmillan, owners of the Nature Publishing Group (NPG), and Springer, owners of Biomed Central and other properties, hit the market with plenty of force. It's a major consolidation, and one that ratchets the Macmillan higher education and journals growth strategy up by an order of magnitude. Now, along with Elsevier, Wiley, and Taylor & Francis, we have another multi-billion-dollar publishing behemoth on the market — the combined entity is valued at $5.8 billion. Measuring by percentage of papers in the market, the new entity takes second place with 13%, just ahead of Wiley (12%), and still far behind Elsevier (23%). By number of journals, the race is nearly neck-and-neck. In this marriage, Macmillan will end up 53% of the assets, Springer 47%, assuming the merger is approved. Springer, you may recall, has been bouncing around among investors for a while. It is currently owned by BC Partners, a private equity firm. BC Partners has stated that it sees its most likely exit from the business coming via an IPO at some later date, perhaps 2-5 years in the future (sources vary in their estimates). The merger centers around higher education and science products, and includes Palgrave Macmillan, Scientific American, Macmillan Education Language Learning, Adis Drug Information, Apress, and Springer's professional publications. An interesting side note is that the CEO of Macmillan, Annette Thomas, will become the new organization's Chief Scientific Officer. Derk Haank of Springer will be the new CEO of the combined entity; he is bringing his COO and CFO along, which suggests that the new entity will be focused primarily on financial and operational performance, which makes sense if they are grooming it for an IPO. There are specific drivers for why these two companies merged, and David Worlock covers it extremely well in a blog post written shortly after the announcement. In addition, as Worlock writes, there is a satisfying nationalistic angle to the deal between Springer and Macmillan's parent, Holtzbrinck, a German family-owned company: 'So both can go happily hand in hand to the German regulator , and get a big tick for accomplishing one of the prized national objectives – keeping Springer, the historical home of German chemistry as it reshaped late nineteenth century science, as a German company.'  BC Partners is a German investment company, making this an all-German transaction. What's left out of the deal is almost as interesting as what's included. For instance, Macmillan's Digital Science is not part of the deal, as a post from Timo Hannay outlined in anodyne terms. This seems like a financial move by Holtzbrinck. Digital Science is in investment mode, meaning that including the property in the current deal would have decreased cash flows and the deal's inherent value ..."
Posted: 21 Jan 2015 12:48 AM PST
"We are very pleased to announce our upcoming conference, jointly organized by COAR and SPARC, that will take place in the beautiful city of Porto, Portugal on April 15-16, 2015. The conference will be co-hosted by our members, the University of Porto and the University of Minho. In a rapidly evolving world, academic and research institutions must think about becoming agents of change, with greater flexibility and responsiveness than ever before. Part of this change is a shift away from the notion that researchers simply conduct research and produce publications, but rather the research community itself must begin to take on responsibility for ensuring research outputs are widely and openly disseminated, properly curated, and preserved. In this sense, the institution becomes one node in a larger, interconnected network of content producers and stewards. There are both challenges and opportunities inherent in this new role. For instance, how do we create a seamless global research network in which all countries and researchers can participate? How can we evaluate research outputs based on their quality, and not on whether they are attached to a prestige publication? How can we manage increasingly large and complex data to support new modes of science and innovation? And how can we ensure that content is appropriately licensed, annotated and preserved to allow it to be re-used and integrated with other related content? Clearly, libraries and institutions must forge new partnerships, nurture new skills and competencies, and develop new organizational structures. This conference will address some of the important challenges facing our libraries as we attempt to re-define our roles in an age of constant flux."
Posted: 20 Jan 2015 08:08 PM PST
"Introduction. The National Institutes of Health public access policy requires the principal investigators of any Institutes-funded research to submit their manuscript to PubMed Central, and the open access publisher Public Library of Science submits all articles to PubMed Central, irrespective of funder. Whether the investigators, who made the decision to publish in one of the seven Public Library of Science journals were motivated by the National Institutes' public access policy or by the journals' quality standards is unknown.  Method. Forty-two Institutes-funded investigators who had published in one of the seven journals between 2005 and 2009 were interviewed, using a semi-structured, open-ended interview schedule.  Analysis. Qualitative analysis was conducted, dividing the participants into those who published in the journals before the mandatory policy (pre-mandate) and those who published after the policy (post-mandate). Results. The Institutes-funded investigators submitted to the Public Library of Science journals because they favour the high impact factor, fast publication speed, fair peer-review system and the articles/ immediate open access availability. Conclusions. The requirements of the National Institutes' public access policy do not influence the investigators' decision to submit to one of the Public Library of Science journals and do not increase their familiarity with open access publishing options."
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)