Over 24,000 coronavirus research papers are now available in one place; MIT Technology Review, March 16, 2020

Karen Hao, MIT Technology Review; Over 24,000 coronavirus research papers are now available in one place

The data set aims to accelerate scientific research that could fight the Covid-19 pandemic.

"The news: Today researchers collaborating across several organizations released the Covid-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19), which includes over 24,000 research papers from peer-reviewed journals as well as sources like bioRxiv and medRxiv (websites where scientists can post non-peer-reviewed preprint papers). The research covers SARS-CoV-2 (the scientific name for the coronavirus), Covid-19 (the scientific name for the disease), and the coronavirus group. It represents the most extensive collection of scientific literature related to the ongoing pandemic and will continue to update in real time as more research is released."

EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists; Nature, April 3, 2018

Quirin Schiermeier, Nature; EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists

"An influential committee of the European Parliament is due to vote this month on changes to copyright regulations in the European Union, but the latest drafts of the rules have triggered a wave of criticism from open-science advocates. They say that the proposals will stifle research and scholarly communication.

Intellectual-property experts agree that existing EU copyright rules need an overhaul for the digital age, and a proposal first circulated by the European Commission in 2016 had this goal in mind. But critics worry that some provisions in more-recent proposals for the law — known as the directive on copyright in the digital single market — conflict with Europe’s principles of open science and freedom of expression."

RIP John Sulston, open science hero and father of the Human Genome Project; BoingBoing, March 9, 2018

Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing; RIP John Sulston, open science hero and father of the Human Genome Project

"Sulston won the Nobel in 2002 and was a force for open science and access to knowledge. His two claims to greatness were his contributions to genomics and his moral leadership. He will be missed."

Open science: Sharing is caring, but is privacy theft? by David Mehler and Kevin Weiner; PLOS Neuro Community Blog, January 31, 2018

Emilie Reas, PLOS Neuro Community Blog; Open science: Sharing is caring, but is privacy theft? by David Mehler and Kevin Weiner

"As we are actively figuring out the balance between transparency and collaboration in research, we thought it was worth reaching out to six of our colleagues who have thought extensively about OS. We hope that additional scientists will weigh in with further insight regarding this balance not only in human brain mapping, but also in other scientific fields.

Specifically, we asked them: What are the main challenges in moving toward Open Science and how can we meet them? Here are their responses:

Kirstie Whitaker (University of Cambridge, Department of Psychiatry):

“Change is coming. Before we continue, let’s define some terms for potential readers: Open Science is an umbrella term that can mean different things to different people. Open access research allows everyone to learn from scientific work (particularly that paid for by the tax payer). Open educational resources mean we don’t re-invent the wheel when we teach others about our work. Open source materials are ones that allow you to see inside, and improve, the black box. Open dataallows researchers to verify our work, and conduct analyses that could not be carried out by one group alone.

Open Science also means open to everyone. We can use the power of curious non-experts through Citizen Science projects. The Open Neuroimaging Laboratory was a finalist for the Open Science Prizeand sought to “lower the barriers for researchers, students, and citizen scientists to help scientific discovery”. We can look to other neuroscience projects such as Eye Wire and FoldIt for inspiration in the future.

Finally, Open Science means open for all. Whose voices are not currently represented well in our field of study? Who is not advancing to tenured positions? How do we ensure that researchers in the developing world are able to contribute to our quest to understand the human brain? All of the open practices above facilitate the inclusion of under-represented minorities, but it will require ongoing focus and consideration to create an equitable community. That’s my biggest challenge: addressing my implicit (and explicit) biases to ensure we have bigger, better and more diverse ideas in the future.

I would like to live in a world where helping to advance the boundary of scientific knowledge is rewarded through new findings and by confirming (or not) already published results irrespective of who owns the data.”"

Five questions about open science answered; Phys.org, May 30, 2017

Elizabeth Gilbert, Katie Corker, 

Phys.org; Five questions about open science answered

"What is "open science"?

Open science is a set of practices designed to make scientific processes and results more transparent and accessible to people outside the research team. It includes making complete research materials, data and lab procedures freely available online to anyone. Many scientists are also proponents of open access, a parallel movement involving making research articles available to read without a subscription or access fee."

Open Science: Beyond Open Access webinar; Library Journal, February 21, 2017

Library Journal; Open Science: Beyond Open Access webinar

"Open Science: Beyond Open Access

Presented by: Dove Press & Library Journal

Event Date & Time: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017, 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM ET / 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM PT

Collaboration can be a major driver for success. When data is shared among researchers, analysts and stakeholders, the opportunities for innovation and development increase exponentially, particularly in the medical and science fields. To be most effective, the Open Science framework demands more than simply sharing data–it requires dedication, transparency and responsible publishing.

Join this webcast to learn from our panel of experts as they discuss the challenges and benefits of Open Science in the context of global health and medical concerns. They will explain how the disruptive concept of Open Data can reshape and improve the nature of research and results.

Panelists

• Dr. Eric Little, VP of Data Science, OSTHUS
• Dr. Robin Bloor, Chief Analyst, The Bloor Group
• Andrew Johnson, Research Data Librarian/Assistant Professor, University of Colorado Boulder

Moderator

• Rebecca Jozwiak, Editorial & Research Director, The Bloor Group"

These Are the Best Ways to Improve the Scientific Publication Process; Quora via Huffington Post, February 13, 2017

Quora via Huffington Post; 

These Are the Best Ways to Improve the Scientific Publication Process

"How should the scientific publication process be rethought to be more meritocratic? originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world.

Answer by Rishabh Jain, MIT PhD, Co-founded two Research based companies in India and America, on Quora:

There are two major hurdles en route to meritocratic publishing:

• Speed to publication.
• Peer review meritocracy/efficacy."

Australian students recreate Martin Shkreli price-hike drug in school lab; Guardian, 11/30/16

Melissa Davey, Guardian; Australian students recreate Martin Shkreli price-hike drug in school lab:

"He said the open nature of the project demystified science and revealed the number of roadblocks the students had faced in coming up with the final product, which involved three complicated chemical steps.

“With science results you can be presented with a polished finished product that hides the false steps along the way,” he said. “The students’ real-time diary highlights their whole process, and is a very transparent way of doing things.”...

He said unfortunately the students would not be able to sell their drug to the US market. While the drug can be bought in Australia for about A$13 for a packet of 50, there are a number of complicated legal roadblocks in the way of producing and selling it in the US.

“Turing has the exclusive rights to sell it, even though the drug is no longer under patent,” Todd said. “The ridiculousness of this legal loophole means if we wanted to launch it as drug in the US we’d have to go through a whole new clinical trial because we would have to compare the Sydney Grammar stuff with the officially sanctioned stuff, and Turing would have to give us the drug to allow those comparisons to be made."

'Moonshot' cancer panel calls for US to create national research database; Guardian, 9/7/16

Amanda Holpuch, Guardian; 'Moonshot' cancer panel calls for US to create national research database:

"The Cancer Moonshot Blue Ribbon Panel report said the recommendations, if implemented, “will transform our understanding of cancer and result in new opportunities to more effectively prevent and treat the disease”.

The 10 recommendations include existing programs that need more funding – such as research to update guidelines for patient symptom control – and brand new initiatives including a human tumor database to monitor and analyze multi-dimensional cell behavior...

But the funding necessary to fulfill these recommendations has not been approved by Congress despite lobbying by the Obama administration, which said it hoped to spend $1bn on the program."

Britain’s scientists are freaking out over Brexit; Washington Post, 7/31/16

William Booth and Karla Adam, Washington Post; Britain’s scientists are freaking out over Brexit:

"British research today is networked, expensive, competitive and global. Being part of a pan-European consortium has helped put Britain in the top handful of countries, based on the frequency of citations of its scientific papers.

Last week the heads of British academic societies posted a public letter reminding everyone that the country’s universities, many of them among the best in the world, are staffed by legions of top-flight researchers from abroad...

Research in the 21st century is more collaborative than ever, the scientists say...

“You can’t do this kind of research in one country,” Rosser said. She is especially worried about what will happen to funding and collaboration for investigating rare diseases."

NASA’s Juno orbiter set to arrive at Jupiter on Monday; Washington Post, 7/4/16

Rachel Feltman, Washington Post; NASA’s Juno orbiter set to arrive at Jupiter on Monday:

[Kip Currier: What a fitting testament NASA's Juno orbiter mission to Jupiter is to reason, shared human endeavor, and Open Science on this day, the USA's 240th birthday.]

"Take a break from your all-American cookout tonight to look up at the sky and think of Juno. On Monday, the football-field-size spacecraft will zip into Jupiter's orbit, allowing us to study the secrets of our solar system's biggest, oldest planet for the first time.

Other spacecraft have visited Jupiter before. But Juno will orbit closer than any of them – within 2,700 miles of the planet's cloud cover – and allow scientists to probe for data from beneath the giant planet's roiling, gassy surface.

"We're barreling down on Jupiter really quick," principal investigator Scott Bolton of the Southwest Research Institute said at a news briefing held at NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab in California on Monday. "It's been an amazing journey."

Around 1:30 p.m. Eastern, he said, Juno passed Europa – the Jovian moon that has subsurface oceans where future missions may look for signs of life. Around half an hour later, it passed Io, the innermost moon.

"In one Jupiter rotation, we'll be there," said Jim Green, director of planetary science for NASA. "What a wonderful day to celebrate. It's a milestone for our country, but also for planetary science.""

In dramatic statement, European leaders call for ‘immediate’ open access to all scientific papers by 2020; Science, 5/27/16

Martin Enserink, Science; In dramatic statement, European leaders call for ‘immediate’ open access to all scientific papers by 2020:

"In what European science chief Carlos Moedas calls a "life-changing" move, European Union member states today agreed on an ambitious new open access (OA) target. All scientific papers should be freely available by 2020, the Competitiveness Council—a gathering of ministers of science, innovation, trade, and industry—concluded after a 2-day meeting in Brussels. But some observers are warning that the goal will be difficult to achieve.

The OA goal is part of a broader set of recommendations in support of Open Science, a concept which also includes improved storage of and access to research data. The Dutch government, which currently holds the rotating E.U. presidency, had lobbied hard for Europe-wide support for Open Science, as had Carlos Moedas, the European Commissioner for Research and Innovation...

A spokesperson for the Competitiveness Council admits the 2020 target "may not be an easy task," but stresses the importance of the council's new resolve. "This is not a law, but it's a political orientation for the 28 governments. The important thing is that there is a consensus."

The council's statement is also slightly ambiguous on what exactly should be accomplished by 2020."

Handful of Biologists Went Rogue and Published Directly to Internet; New York Times, 3/15/16

Amy Harmon, New York Times; Handful of Biologists Went Rogue and Published Directly to Internet:

"On Feb. 29, Carol Greider of Johns Hopkins University became the third Nobel Prize laureate biologist in a month to do something long considered taboo among biomedical researchers: She posted a report of her recent discoveries to a publicly accessible website, bioRxiv, before submitting it to a scholarly journal to review for “official’’ publication.

It was a small act of information age defiance, and perhaps also a bit of a throwback, somewhat analogous to Stephen King’s 2000 self-publishing an e-book or Radiohead’s 2007 release of a download-only record without a label. To commemorate it, she tweeted the website’s confirmation under the hashtag #ASAPbio, a newly coined rallying cry of a cadre of biologists who say they want to speed science by making a key change in the way it is published...

The delays prevent scientists from showing off their most recent work to prospective employers or benefactors. They have also, some researchers say, begun to look faintly absurd against the general expectations for speed and openness in the not-so-new digital age. With the rapid spread of the Zika virus, for instance, several journals signed a statement promising that scientists would not be penalized for immediately releasing their findings, given the potential benefit for public health, in turn prompting some scientists to ask, why draw the line at Zika?"

Teenage Mutant Ninja Journal! Celebrating an Open Access Birthday; Scientific American, 10/20/14

Hilda Bastian, Scientific American; Teenage Mutant Ninja Journal! Celebrating an Open Access Birthday:

“The world of medical journals needs a fresh infusion of idealism.”

And with those words from PLOS founders, Mike Eisen, Pat Brown, and Harold Varmus, the first issue of PLOS Medicine launched 10 years ago today.

Its “mutant” superpower was being open access. Then – as now – it was bold, idealistic, and an active advocate for open science.

The year before, when PLOS had just arrived, Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet, wrote:

“An historic realignment of power is beginning to take place in scientific and medical journal publishing. Nobody is certain about the final outcome.”"