NIH Cuts ICR – Implications for Research Institutions and Scholarly Publishing
What are the implications of last Friday’s NIH ICR budget cut? @lisalibrarian offers an early analysis.
What are the implications of last Friday’s NIH ICR budget cut? @lisalibrarian offers an early analysis.
The NIH is warning its funded authors against publishing in predatory journals, and the FTC has secured a preliminary injunction against OMICS for alleged predatory publishing practices. Will this mark a turning point in the fight against fraudulent scholarly publishing?
Researchers claim that PMC boosts citations by 26%. A closer look at the paper reveals serious data and analysis problems. Can we collectively design a better study?
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s post based on his FOIA request documents show that PubMed Central spends most of its money tagging author manuscripts, and that its stricter rules for NIH authors may double its costs.
Journals and funding agencies are focusing on data availability as a route to better experimental reproducibility. But the data is only part of the equation. A new set of NIH guidelines is a great start toward making methodologies better documented and more available.
Journals in the arts, humanities and social sciences are often seen as the poor relations compared with their counterparts in science, technology, and medicine – but perhaps that is starting to change.
Using free government infrastructure that’s not available to everyone else raises questions of fairness, which lead to questions of harm. But who is harmed may be both obvious and subtle.
An interview from April 2012, which remains as relevant today in explaining the incentives driving much of the behavior in academic research centers and scientific and scholarly publishing.
New documents obtained via an ongoing FOIA request show that PubMed Central spends most of its money tagging author manuscripts, and that its stricter rules for NIH authors may double its costs.
PubMed Central reduces article downloads from 14 biomedical society websites when articles are made freely available after embargo.
A library group reveals that its plans to launch an open access romance portal have fallen through.
The continued silence from major funders involved in the eLife-PubMed Central scandal is creating a noise all its own.
The OSTP memorandum is a reasonable step forward for everyone. However, a NYT editorial provides misleading interpretations of its scope and design.
The OSTP public access memorandum provides flexibility across many US federal agencies. The possible complexities combined with current budget realities mean there is much to tame and little to spend doing it.
The shootings in Connecticut last year can be, to some extent, blamed on research funding cuts and political intrusions into public health research.