1. Who Knows About
the Future of
Medical Publishing?
Chris Graf
cgraf@wiley.com
27 January 2010

2. These guys know about the future

3. So do these guys

4. And these guys too...

5. But what do we know?
• Competition is fierce
• Competition is from new directions
• Communities still form around
interests
• And medics read more, and faster

6. Medics read more, faster
Articles read Time spent Time per
Work field
(per year) (hours) article (min)
Univ. Med. ~322 118 22
Chemists ~276 198 43
Life
~239 104 26
scientists
Physicists ~204 153 45
Soc
~191 121 38
Sci/Psych
Engineers ~72 97 81
Source: Tenopir, User behavior across international and disciplinary boundaries

7. The future
• Things that are new
• Things that stay the same

8. So, what’s new?
• Interfaces Each taken
• Interactions in turn, with
examples
• Integration
and a few
• New models comments

9. Interfaces
• Print  Online
• Desktops  Devices
Platforms  Mobile apps
• PDF  HTML

10. 1957 

11.  2011

12.  Mass Market Devices, Apps

13.  Specialist Devices, Apps

14. Flat PDF 

15.  Functional HTML

16. Interactions
• Letters to the editor  Comments, blogs
• Aggregate metrics  Article metrics
• Readers  Unique users

17.  Comments

18.  Article metrics

20. Metrics are cool.
But not all of them
are useful, or used

21. Like these on
http://realtime.springer.com
Cool, but are they useful?

22. Integration
• Of digital tools into editors workflows
• Of content and tools into research,
teaching, learning workflows
• Of content into practice, point of
care, and decision support tools

23. This is a CrossCheck report on a presentation I gave about plagiarism with a 36% “similarity index”
 Tools for editors

24.  For research

25. http://www.youtube.com/user/IJCPeditorial
 For teaching

26.  For learning

27.  For point of care

28. And despite
rumours
to the
contrary

29. http://tmbot.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/sustainable-business-strategies-for-smes-in-a-dying-industry/

30. New models
• It all needs a business model
– Subscriptions, rental (reader, library pays)
– Open access (author, funder pays)
– Online advertising (sponsor pays)
– Others… versus… none at all?

31.  Rental

32.  Open access
Top research funders in PLoS One

33.  Open access
BioMed Central
members globally
(from mid-2010)

34. Open access:
an ideology
more than a
business
model

35. 0.05%
Authors paying to publish „open access‟ accounts for 0.05% of Elsevier‟s total revenues.
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authorshome.authors/sponsoredarticles

36.  Versus … No model

37. What stays the same?

40. What did I learn? To
listen more. And to walk
to the edge of my field,
lean over the fence, and
talk with the other
stubborn mules who live
next door.