Weekly digest: AI literacy, open publishing models and equity in OA

In this final edition of the weekly digest, we share practical guidance on navigating copyright in medical communications and explore why critical AI literacy is increasingly central to patient empowerment. We examine new evidence highlighting uneven transparency and stakeholder engagement across global health research and look at the structural factors driving persistent equity challenges in OA publishing. We also discuss the growing momentum behind the alternative Publish, Review, Curate publishing model. Finally, we highlight a new learning resource designed to support better practice in open research data management and FAIR principles.

To read:

Copyright essentials for medical communications: key insights and practical guidance via Copyright Clearance Center | 3-minute read

This Copyright Clearance Center community hub brings together practical guidance and industry insights to help medical communications professionals navigate copyright, permissions and content reuse across projects. Key themes include common misconceptions about internal versus external use, best practices for licensing figures, tables and articles, as well as the impact of open access (OA) and artificial intelligence (AI) tools on reuse rights. Experts also address real‑world questions on training materials, congress presentations and enterprise licences, highlighting that permission requirements often apply regardless of audience or format. Overall, the resource emphasizes proactive compliance to reduce risk while enabling efficient collaboration and innovation in medical communications.

Critical AI literacy drives patient empowerment in healthcare via National Academy of Medicine | 14-minute read

A new National Academy of Medicine commentary argues that critical AI health literacy is becoming an essential skill for patient empowerment. While institutional AI tools often prioritize efficiency, compliance and cost control, patient‑directed AI can enhance autonomy by helping individuals question recommendations and biases, interpret data critically and explore alternative perspectives. The authors provide case studies and suggest that patients can address risks associated with AI using ‛algorithmic resistance’, defined as “the deliberate and informed use of AI to challenge institutional priorities that conflict with patient values”.

Transparency and engagement remain uneven in global health research via BMJ Journals | 20-minute read

A new BMJ Open study assesses how well global health research is being monitored for transparency and stakeholder engagement across trials, publications and funder outputs. While the study highlights inconsistencies in trial registration and timely reporting, with fewer than half of studies sharing results within 2 years, it also points to opportunities for improvement. With many studies already published as OA, strengthening patient and stakeholder involvement could help drive a more inclusive and transparent research ecosystem. These findings highlight the potential for global health research to become more collaborative and accountable in the future.

Equity challenges persist in OA publishing via Springer Nature | 10-minute read

This EMBO Reports editorial explores how article processing charges (APCs) have contributed to uneven access in OA publishing, particularly for researchers with limited funding. Although OA now represents about half of published research, access and quality remain inconsistent across regions and institutions. This editorial highlights a strategic proposal for a more sustainable transition: funders could award funding to journals on a competitive basis to encourage adoption of open science, reproducibility and quality mandates. This approach could help create a fairer and more sustainable OA system, making research more widely available.

Publish, Review, Curate gains momentum as an alternative publishing model via COAR | 5-minute read

A recent public forum hosted by the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) and partners brought researchers, publishers, librarians and funders together to explore the Publish, Review, Curate model as an alternative to traditional scholarly publishing. Discussions highlighted growing frustration with subscription and APC‑based systems, alongside concerns about research integrity, delays and opaque peer review. The Publish, Review, Curate approach, which builds on preprints and open, community‑led peer review, was widely seen as a practical and ready‑to‑use alternative that could improve transparency, efficiency and trust in research publishing. Participants stressed the importance of acting now to expand the adoption of Publish, Review, Curate before enthusiasm for change slows.

To engage with:

Learning resource: open research data and FAIR principles via OpenLearnity

OpenLearnity offers this free, self‑paced online course covering open research data, research data management and FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) data principles. The course is designed to support researchers and research‑adjacent professionals in developing practical skills for managing, sharing and reusing data responsibly. Content is fully open and interactive, making it easy to dip in and learn at your own pace.

Looking ahead

This edition marks the final Open Pharma weekly digest. From 2026, we will be introducing a new monthly format to share updates from Open Pharma projects alongside headlines from the open science ecosystem. Thank you for reading and engaging with the weekly digest since its launch in 2017, and we look forward to continuing the journey together in 2026!

---

Enjoy our content? Read last week’s digest and check out our latest quarterly update!

Don’t forget to follow us on Bluesky and LinkedIn for regular updates!