Research must be well planned, carried out correctly and reported in a clear and transparent way, as the reliability of the results depends on the rigor of the experimental design. However, in the published reports, there seems to be a lack of commitment by those responsible for assessing the quality of the research. Experts pointed out that the current incentive structures in research institutions do not sufficiently encourage researchers to invest in solidity and transparency, instead encouraging them to optimize their aptitude in the fight for publications and grants. Over the past decade, large-scale replication studies have shown that reproducibility is far from favorable in many scientific fields, and questionable research practices are becoming more prevalent. Clearly something is not working in the scientific enterprise. … Read More →
SciELO joins OA Switchboard with over 300 open access journals in the SciELO Brazil collection
SciELO Brazil is now live and connected to OA Switchboard to support widespread visibility and access to SciELO journals. … Read More →
Funders support use of reviewed preprints in research assessment [Originally published by eLife in December/2022]
Funders and other research organisations are embracing reviewed preprints as an alternative way to assess researchers, and call on others to do the same. … Read More →
Why is it important to support open infrastructure for preprints?
The importance of preprints in scholarly communication has been increasing, as well as their credibility and use in every discipline. However, the preprint ecosystem is not yet financially sustainable, and most preprints are not shared using open infrastructure. A report by the Invest in Open Infrastructure initiative examines the current preprint landscape in detail and makes important recommendations that aim at making a system for open infrastructure services for preprints viable, robust, and reliable. … Read More →
eLife ends accept/reject decisions following peer review [Originally published by eLife in October/2022]
eLife will emphasise the public peer review of preprints, restoring author autonomy and promoting the assessment of scientists based on what, not where, they publish. … Read More →
Open Access and Closed Research. Who benefits from the APC?
Recent research published in Scientometrics raises questions about unforeseen consequences of the spread of Open Access scientific publishing that have to do with the growth of total expenditures and who would be the economic beneficiaries of this paradigm shift. … Read More →
Death Notice: Francisco Alberto de Moura Duarte, first President of ABEC Brasil
Francisco Alberto de Moura Duarte, retired professor from the University of São Paulo Medical School and President of ABEC Brasil for the first two mandates (1985-1987, 1988-1990), passed away on Tuesday, August 30, 2022, in Ribeirão Preto, SP. Professor Moura Duarte was an eminent scientist in the field of molecular genetics, with participation in institutions in the country and abroad. Available in Portuguese only. … Read More →
SciELO Data repository in regular operation
Launched in August 2020 as part of the SciELO Program’s positioning as an Open Science program, the SciELO Data research data repository has been in regular operation since January 2022. It is a repository aligned with the state of the art in the management of contents underlying the articles’ texts. … Read More →
Research assessment should go beyond comparing impact metrics
The assessment of research results that mainly relies on citation-based metrics has limitations that lead to distortions in the management of human and financial resources in research institutions around the world. The innovative Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, created by the initiative of the European Commission and organizations from this continent with the support of 350 public and private organizations from more than 40 countries, has just been published, and establishes criteria that value qualitative assessment and limit the use of quantitative indicators. … Read More →
Three takeaways from our July 19 Publish Your Reviews event
What are the benefits of open peer reviews on preprints, and why should researchers consider publishing their journal-invited reviews alongside preprints? ASAPbio fellows orgazined in July 2022 the event “Why Publish Your Reviews?” with the objective to answer this question. … Read More →
Supporting public preprint review through collaborative reviews – an update on ASAPbio’s crowd preprint review
ASAPbio has been supporting preprint feedback since 2021 through their crowd preprint review activities which seek to draw on the collective input of a group of commenters who each can comment on the preprint according to their level of expertise and interest. They are currently midway through their activities for 2022, which include Portuguese preprints from SciELO Preprints, and wanted to share an update on the progress. … Read More →
Announcing Publish Your Reviews
Today, we’re excited to launch Publish Your Reviews, an initiative encouraging reviewers to post their comments alongside the preprint versions of articles. We invite all researchers interested in promoting more open dialog around preprints to sign the pledge. … Read More →
PLOS reports on publishing Peer Review History
PLOS, a pioneer of open access publishing in the years 2000, reports the results of its open peer review policy implemented in 2019. Published Peer Review History is the result of the reviewer’s choice to sign their peer review and the author’s choice to publish the Peer Review History, which consists of several documents. … Read More →
Data papers… and FAIR [Originally published in the Road to FAIR blog in June/2022]
In a scientific ecosystem increasingly oriented towards the perspective of Open Science, data papers are a new species of scholarly publication, especially in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). … Read More →
Open Science in the Humanities
Following the event Open Science in the Humanities, organized by SciELO in partnership with the representatives of the area in the Advisory Committee, Luiz Augusto Campos and Bernardo Buarque de Hollanda, a brief description and balance of the main thematic axes debated was made, emphasizing at the end the importance of dialogue between the editors of the different subareas, establishing interchanges, elucidating doubts and highlighting strengths and weaknesses in the challenges of implementing open science, according to the consideration of the specificities and diversity of the contemplated journals. … Read More →
Recent Comments