1. Independence Lost - Taxpayer Funding and Information Access Takes a Dark Turn
We once assumed taxpayer-funding meant information availability. The new US government is now actively hiding scientific data, imperiling the understanding of the world, notes Kent Anderson, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): There are no non-taxpayer-funded value additions to the data sets by separate for-profit or non-profit entities. These data are collected and managed using taxpayer funding, as are the sites that once hosted them (or those that have taken over, in the case of the cities preserving data). There is an uninterrupted line from data acquisition to presentation. Worse, the bureaucrats making these decisions are themselves taxpayer-funded. Public health crises like Flint surely require public officials, paid by taxpayers, to make the government function for the citizens' benefit. And removal of public information in its entirety is categorically different from a disagreement about business models. The imperatives here are much more direct and immediate, the affront to society more direct………………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. How access to knowledge can help universal health coverage become a reality
Universal health coverage is defined by the WHO as free access to promotive, preventive, curative and rehabilitative health services. These have to be of a sufficient quality to be effective but without causing unnecessary financial hardship when paying for the services, notes Stevan Bruijns, in his post in The Conversation Blog.
The blog post says (quote): It is hard to argue the possibilities if the 2.7 million plus health care publications published within the last three years were freely accessible in low and middle income countries. It would likely confer a tremendous benefit to both health care professionals and patients (or even universal health coverage). It is important to understand that the purpose of access to knowledge generated in high income countries is not simply to copy it verbatim into lower income settings. The comparative resource restrictions that apply renders direct implementation largely unfeasible. However, accessible knowledge, wherever generated, provides the references needed to generate locally appropriate applications thereof………………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. Fake peer review strikes again for pair of authors
Elsevier recently retracted the second paper by the duo, a 2015 paper in a cancer journal, after finding evidence of fake peer review. The paper was submitted in October 2014 and accepted just a week before our piece on fake peer review appeared in Nature, discusses a post in Retraction Watch Blog.
The blog post says (quote): According to the notice, after investigating the paper, which appeared in Cancer Letters, the publisher concluded that it was accepted 'based upon the positive advice of at least two faked reviewer reports.' The notice also explained that the identities of several authors 'could not be confirmed.' This appears to be the second fake peer review offense for the corresponding authors-Augus N. Bethune and Shi Hu, who are both based at the Tianjin Joint Academy of Biomedicine and Technology in China. In 2015, the journal Amino Acids retracted a paper from Bethune, who was a corresponding author, and Hu, a middle author, because 'the peer review process was compromised.'………………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. What Types of Usage Data do Information Managers Actually Want? [Research]
A new survey from research and advisory firm, Outsell, Inc., highlights the importance of frequent and detailed usage data for information managers in order to show the value of content spend. Casey Pickering, in her post in the CCC Blog, discusses that research confirms the value of usage data in supporting R&D, product innovation, and competitive advantage.
The blog post says (quote): Most information managers are tasked with proving that high cost content is worth the expense. According to the survey, collecting comprehensive usage data on a regular basis is crucial for many information managers because it offers real insight into what content is worth the investment. Respondents noted that not only does usage data demonstrate the specific value of subscriptions, it also allows them to accurately allocate charges within the organisation. Respondents were clear about what they want to do with usage information. For example, they need to be able to: convert data into visuals; compare different pricing models; and access statistics that are in a useable format (i.e. electronic)………………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply