Author: Lilian Nassi-calò

Reproducibility of research results: on-going initiatives

From Space Sciences to Clinical Medicine, different areas of knowledge are facing research results credibility problems. However, scientific societies, public health institutions and the private sector are engaged to curb this tendency. Those involved believe that increasing the transparency of data by way of publishing primary research data in open access repositories and promoting online forums for comments on published articles are promising initiatives. Read More →

Reproducibility of research results: the tip of the iceberg

Research on clinical trials with drugs under development is the foundation upon which pharmaceutical companies base the development of their new drugs, thus the reliability of the outcomes of this research is of utmost importance. However studies show that between 60% and 70% of this research may include irreproducible results. It is necessary that the parties involved become aware of the extent of the problem and join together to find a solution. Read More →

Reproducibility of research results: a subjective view

At a time when discussions about ethics in experimentation and scientific publication are going beyond laboratories and academic environments, and are peaking the interest of society as a whole, another threat is emerging to the credibility of science. Irreproducibility of research results is affecting the different areas of knowledge and is of concern to all. The pressure on researchers for positive and high impact outcomes is bound up with the natural desire of scientists to make groundbreaking discoveries, even if the evidence points to the contrary. Read More →

PubMed Commons: NLM launches pilot version of open comments on articles

The United States National Library of Medicine announced the implementation of the PubMed Commons, an innovative system that enables researchers to comment on published scientific papers, promoting a forum of discussion among peers. For the pilot phase, NIH and Wellcome Trust scientists were selected to test the initiative, along with invited colleagues. This system meets the worldwide trend to promote the open discussion of research results. Read More →

Controversial Article in The Journal “Science” exposes the weaknesses of Peer-Review in a set of Open Access Journals

Just before celebrating the Open Access Week worldwide, a controversial article published on Science exposed the recurrent question of the weaknesses of the peer review process in scientific communication. The paper focus on the selection of journals which collect article processing fees and describes how 304 versions of a fictitious article containing serious and obvious flaws were accepted in 157 open access journals, many already considered predatory. This post describes the experiment and gathers comments from international blogs. Read More →

How much does it cost to publish in Open Access?

Open Access (OA) publication has become the accepted way of providing society with an idea of the public funds used to finance research. Open Access publication does not have a zero cost attached to it. It is however, put forward as a more economical model than journals which are financed by subscriptions. This post analyzes the financing of OA publication and puts forward business models which are seen as sustainable. Read More →

Indicators of academic productivity in University rankings: criteria and methodologies

The collective academic output of professors, researchers and students affiliated to universities, measured by the number of articles that are published in indexed journals and/or by citations they receive, is one of major indicators used in the elaboration of university rankings. However, each ranking evaluates academic output differently. Read More →

Paper proposes four pillars for scholarly communication to favor the speed and the quality of science

The authors identify four converging cornerstones for advancing the process of communicating academic research: enhancing products and formats of scholarly communication; immediate publication in Open Access; open peer review; and broad public recognition of the process of communication, of the corresponding products and of the academics involved. Read More →

Open Access and a call to prevent the looming crisis in science

The number of retracted articles has recently been on the rise. Björn Brembs identifies this tendency as a reflection of an imminent crisis in science whose origin is found in the reward and marketing system of researchers which pressures them to publish in high impact journals. The adoption of open access platforms is a way to prevent this crisis. Read More →

Declaration recommends eliminate the use of Impact factor for research evaluation

The use of the Impact Factor (IF) beyond the scope of journal ranking as a direct or indirect proxy for the evaluation of research quality, career promotions, granting of funds, ranking of graduate programs, etc. has been questioned for quite some time. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment makes a new and critical call against the use of the IF in the evaluation of research. Read More →