Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Opening up Scientific and Scholarly Communication

93 views

Published on

Talk for UC Davis Data Sciences Initiative series on Reproducibility and Scientific Integrity

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Opening up Scientific and Scholarly Communication

  1. 1. Opening Up Scientific and Scholarly Communication Jonathan A. Eisen @phylogenomics February 26, 2018
  2. 2. Disclosures
  3. 3. Some History
  4. 4. Public Library of Science (PLoS) • Started in 2000 by • Harold Varmus • Pat Brown • Michael Eisen • First action was to circulate an open letter on publishing
  5. 5. The Letter We support the establishment of an online public library that would provide the full contents of the published record of research and scholarly discourse in medicine and the life sciences in a freely accessible, fully searchable, interlinked form. Establishment of this public library would vastly increase the accessibility and utility of the scientific literature, enhance scientific productivity, and catalyze integration of the disparate communities of knowledge and ideas in biomedical sciences.We recognize that the publishers of our scientific journals have a legitimate right to a fair financial return for their role in scientific communication. We believe, however, that the permanent, archival record of scientific research and ideas should neither be owned nor controlled by publishers, but should belong to the public and should be freely available through an international online public library.To encourage the publishers of our journals to support this endeavor, we pledge that, beginning in September 2001, we will publish in, edit or review for, and personally subscribe to only those scholarly and scientific journals that have agreed to grant unrestricted free distribution rights to any and all original research reports that they have published, through PubMed Central and similar online public resources, within 6 months of their initial publication date.
  6. 6. The Letter We support the establishment of an online public library that would provide the full contents of the published record of research and scholarly discourse in medicine and the life sciences in a freely accessible, fully searchable, interlinked form. Establishment of this public library would vastly increase the accessibility and utility of the scientific literature, enhance scientific productivity, and catalyze integration of the disparate communities of knowledge and ideas in biomedical sciences.We recognize that the publishers of our scientific journals have a legitimate right to a fair financial return for their role in scientific communication. We believe, however, that the permanent, archival record of scientific research and ideas should neither be owned nor controlled by publishers, but should belong to the public and should be freely available through an international online public library.To encourage the publishers of our journals to support this endeavor, we pledge that, beginning in September 2001, we will publish in, edit or review for, and personally subscribe to only those scholarly and scientific journals that have agreed to grant unrestricted free distribution rights to any and all original research reports that they have published, through PubMed Central and similar online public resources, within 6 months of their initial publication date.
  7. 7. Signatories of Petition
  8. 8. Signed the Petition
  9. 9. My Brother Didn’t Want Me J-
 
 Can you get people to sign this and FAX it to me. 1-786-549-0137. Craig and
 Claires sigs would be greatly appreciated.
 
 I assume I can put your name on it, no?
 
 I set up a site http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org to keep lists of
 people who have signed.
 
 -M
  10. 10. PLoS After the Letter (2003) • > 25,000 people signed the letter • Small increase in open access support • But not enough • So PLoS announced the launch of their own journals •PLoS Biology •PLoS Medicine
  11. 11. Open Data Experiments
  12. 12. Open Data Experiments Useful but not convinced
  13. 13. Real Life Intervened
  14. 14. RhoGam • Supplier • RhoGAM should be administered within 72 hours of known or suspected exposure to Rh-positive red blood cells. • Wikipedia • It is given by intramuscular injection as part of modern routine antenatal care at about 28 weeks of pregnancy, and within 72 hours after childbirth.[5] It is also given after antenatal pathological events that are likely to cause a feto-maternal hemorrhage.[6] • Question • What happens if you do it even later?
  15. 15. Pubmed Search
  16. 16. Relevant Paper
  17. 17. Paywall You can purchase online access to this article (and all its versions) for a 24- hour period. Articles are US $  29.95, with some exceptions where prices may vary. Click "Buy Now" to display the price
  18. 18. Relevant Paper 2
  19. 19. Paywall
  20. 20. Access Blocked - What Next? • Bought lots of articles • Tried to contact experts • Got friends to get some articles from libraries • Got more and more pissed off
  21. 21. Baby Lost • Benjamin Augustin Eisen stillborn August 29, 2003
  22. 22. Lack of Access • Scientist without access • Would access have helped? • Is limiting access useful or needed? • Goal of much of scientific and medical research is to spread knowledge
  23. 23. Open Access Spreading …
  24. 24. Closed Accessitis Still Prevalent Closed Accessitis Elsevieritis
  25. 25. Cure for Closed Accessitis? Closed Accessitis Elsevieritis
  26. 26. What Can You Do?
  27. 27. 1. Support #OA • Publish more openly • Preprints • Publish OA • Support OA • Cancel subscriptions • Review only for OA papers • Push funding agencies to require OA and pay for it • Push societies and publishers to move more to OA • Push for quality in OA publishing
  28. 28. 2. Be More Open About EVERYTHING • Open Publishing • Open Review • Open Data • Open Source • Open Notebooks • Open Grants • Open Meetings • Open Communications • Open Hardware
  29. 29. 3. Assess people by Contributions • Evaluate actual contributions not surrogates • ignore Impact Factor • ignore Journal names • Push for more recognition of diverse contributions • Hire, retain, promote people who participate in open scholarship
  30. 30. 3. Use and Attribute Open Material • Use open material • Cite and attribute open material • Remix and repurpose
  31. 31. Reduce Risks of Openness • Open Publishing • Open Review • Open Data • Open Source • Open Notebooks • Open Grants • Open Meetings • Open Communications • Open Hardware

×