bims-skolko Biomed News
on Scholarly communication
Issue of 2020‒01‒12
seventeen papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society


  1. Environ Health. 2020 Jan 07. 19(1): 2
    Ozonoff DM, Grandjean P.
      A scientific journal like Environmental Health strives to publish research that is useful within the field covered by the journal's scope, in this case, public health. Useful research is more likely to make a difference. However, in many, if not most cases, the usefulness of an article can be difficult to ascertain until after its publication. Although replication is often thought of as a requirement for research to be considered valid, this criterion is retrospective and has resulted in a tendency toward inertia in environmental health research. An alternative viewpoint is that useful work is "stable", i.e., not likely to be soon contradicted. We present this alternative view, which still relies on science being consensual, although pointing out that it is not the same as replicability, while not in contradiction. We believe that viewing potential usefulness of research reports through the lens of stability is a valuable perspective.
    Keywords:  Generalizability; Quality; Replication; Reproducibility; Scientific journals; Validity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0556-5
  2. Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Jan 07.
    Puljak L, Sambunjak D.
      Ethical considerations arise when individuals who were contracted and paid to conduct a research study and write it up for publication, are denied authorship on a scholarly publication on the grounds that their work was contracted and paid for. Each of the various stakeholders should be considered. Researchers need to make sure that the contract recognizes their intellectual contribution and their right to be named as authors if and when the contracted study is published. If authorship disputes of published works arise, journal editors should have mechanisms in place for addressing such disputes. They should be able to see the contract and have all disputing parties agree to any changes in authorship. If the dispute cannot be resolved, the manuscript should be retracted. Contractors should develop a publication plan and include in the contract stipulations ensuring transparent and unambiguous authorship on any publication ensuing from contracted work. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the Committee for Publication Ethics should update their guidance for authors to include advice regarding researchers involved in contracted work and how to resolve an authorship disputes around it.
    Keywords:  Authorship; Contract; Payment; Publication ethics; Research integrity
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00173-5
  3. Gac Sanit. 2020 Jan 07. pii: S0213-9111(19)30270-5. [Epub ahead of print]
    Shamsi A.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2019.10.007
  4. J Exp Biol. 2020 Jan 06. pii: jeb220053. [Epub ahead of print]223(Pt 1):
    Hoppeler H, Handel M.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.220053
  5. Arch Craniofac Surg. 2019 Dec;20(6): 345-346
    Chung KJ.
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2019.00787
  6. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2019 Dec;51(4): 193-194
    K Wong R.
      
  7. Nature. 2020 01;577(7789): 167-169
    Grey A, Bolland MJ, Avenell A, Klein AA, Gunsalus CK.
      
    Keywords:  Ethics; Institutions; Publishing; Research data
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03959-6
  8. Commun Biol. 2019 Sep 20. 2(1): 352
      
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-019-0603-3
  9. Sci Total Environ. 2020 Jan 02. pii: S0048-9697(19)36450-2. [Epub ahead of print] 136454
    Pourret O, Irawan DE, Tennant JP, Wien C, Dorch BF.
      There are major challenges that need to be addressed in the world of scholarly communication, especially in the field of environmental studies and in the context of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Recently, Sonne et al. (2020) published an article in Science of the Total Environment discussing some of these challenges. However, we feel that many of the arguments misrepresent critical elements of Open Access (OA), Plan S, and broader issues in scholarly publishing. In our response, we focus on addressing key elements of their discussion on (i) OA and Plan S, as well as (ii) Open Access Predatory Journals (OAPJ). The authors describe OA and Plan S as restricting author choice, especially through the payment of article-processing charges. The reality is that 'green OA' self-archiving options alleviate virtually all of the risks they mention, and are even the preferred 'routes' to OA as stated by both institutional and national policies in Denmark. In alignment with this, Plan S is also taking a progressive stance on reforming research evaluation. The assumptions these authors make about OA in the "global south" also largely fail to acknowledge some of the progressive work being done in regions like Indonesia and Latin America. Finally, Sonne et al. (2020) highlight the threat that OAPJs face to our scholarly knowledge production system. While we agree generally that OAPJs are problematic, the authors simultaneously fail to mention many of the excellent initiatives helping to combat this threat (e.g., the Directory of Open Access Journals). We call for researchers to more effectively equip themselves with sufficient knowledge of relevant systems before making public statements about them, in order to prevent misinformation from polluting the debate about the future of scholarly communication.
    Keywords:  Open Access; Open science; Plan S; Predatory journals; Scholarly communication
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136454
  10. FEBS J. 2020 Jan;287(1): 4-10
    Martin SJ.
      Seamus Martin holds the Smurfit Chair of Medical Genetics at the Smurfit Institute of Genetics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. His laboratory works on diverse aspects of cell death control, including the role of 'death receptors' as initiators of inflammation and the role of IL-1 family cytokines as key initiators of inflammation in the context of necrotic cell death. Seamus received the GlaxoSmithKline Award of The Biochemical Society (2006) and The RDS-Irish Times Boyle Medal (2015) for his work on the role of caspases in apoptosis and was elected to the Royal Irish Academy in 2006 and EMBO in 2009. He is the Editor-in-Chief of The FEBS Journal since 2014.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.15191
  11. FEBS Open Bio. 2020 Jan;10(1): 4-5
    De la Rosa MA.
      In this Editorial, the new Editor-in-Chief Professor Miguel A. De la Rosa introduces his plans for the journal.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1002/2211-5463.12781