Featuring the driving forces of open science, the European COVID-19 Data Portal, the launch of IndiaRxiv, a survey investigating opinions on co-reviewing, a study on open science principles, how COVID-19 is reshaping science and a breakdown of the Creative Commons licences.
A tale of two ‘buts’ via WONKHE
Elizabeth Gadd, Research Policy Manager at Loughborough University, outlines what she calls the two big ‘buts’ that often stand in the way of open access: ‘but what about profit?’ and ‘but what about credit?’. During a global crisis, profit margins and the pursuit of glamour should not be the driving forces behind data dissemination. Looking to the future, funding bodies should follow the likes of Gates Open Research and Wellcome Open Research in establishing funder-based, open access publishing platforms.
The European COVID-19 Data Portal via European Commission
A joint effort between the European Commission, the European Bioinformatics Institute, COMPARE, Elixir and EU Member States has enabled the launch of the European COVID-19 Data Portal. The portal fulfils the ninth action point for coordinated research and innovation actions from the ERAvsCorona Action Plan published earlier this month.
The launch of IndiaRxiv via Nature
Following the success of region-specific preprint servers such as INA-Rxiv and AfricArXiv, Open Access India have announced the launch of IndiaRxiv. The sever will start accepting submissions written in English or any of the Indian languages at the end of April 2020.
Ghostwriting or professional development? via The Publication Plan
A recent survey published in eLife highlights the practice of co-reviewing, according to which an additional non-invited reviewer, often an early-career researcher, makes a significant contribution to, or even writes, a peer review report. Although the boundary between ghostwriting and a hands-on training in the peer review process is somewhat blurred, the majority of the survey respondents felt that co-reviewing is a beneficial and ethical form of training.
Vicente-Saez et al. 2020: putting open science into practice via ScienceDirect
This study, published in Technological Forecasting and Social Change, identifies the four key principles and practices underlying institutional open science and innovation: transparency, accessibility, authorization and participation. Based on their findings, Vicente-Saez and colleagues propose a governance model and an open exploration policy for higher education institutions.
Post-COVID-19 publishing processes via Medium
The scientific community’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak has proved that open access and interdisciplinary collaboration is possible. Scientific publishing and data dissemination processes have been upended by the pandemic and are being reshaped every day; Omar Ballester a PhD candidate in the Economics of Science and Innovation at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, asks what the future holds for these processes.
Copyright versus Creative Commons via The Scholarly Kitchen
In the UK, copyright and licensing laws date back to 1662, following the success of the printing press. However, over time, these laws have become convoluted and harder to navigate than before. Here, Robert Harington, Associate Executive Director for Publishing of the American Mathematical Society, dissects the different Creative Commons licences and discusses their various advantages and disadvantages.
We at Open Pharma would like to continue to encourage all our readers to look after themselves and their community and continue to follow advice from their country’s government and health organizations.
Coronavirus mental health and wellbeing resources:
