EN

Open access book usage data – how close is COUNTER to the other kind?

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Ronald Snijder

In April 2020, the OAPEN Library moved to a new platform, based on DSpace 6. During the same period, IRUS-UK started working on the deployment of Release 5 of the COUNTER Code of Practice (R5). This is, therefore, a good moment to compare two widely used usage metrics – R5 and Google Analytics (GA).

This article discusses the download data of close to 11,000 books and chapters from the OAPEN Library, from the period 15 April 2020 to 31 July 2020. When a book or chapter is downloaded, it is logged by GA and at the same time a signal is sent to IRUS-UK.

This results in two datasets: the monthly downloads measured in GA and the usage reported by R5, also clustered by month. The number of downloads reported by GA is considerably larger than R5. The total number of downloads in GA for the period is over 3.6 million.

In contrast, the amount reported by R5 is 1.5 million, around 400,000 downloads per month. Contrasting R5 and GA data on a country-by-country basis shows significant differences. GA lists more than five times the number of downloads for several countries, although the totals for other countries are about the same.

When looking at individual tiles, of the 500 highest ranked titles in GA that are also part of the 1,000 highest ranked titles in R5, only 6% of the titles are relatively close together. The choice of metric service has considerable consequences on what is reported.

Thus, drawing conclusions about the results should be done with care. One metric is not better than the other, but we should be open about the choices made. After all, open access book metrics are complicated, and we can only benefit from clarity.

URL : Open access book usage data – how close is COUNTER to the other kind?

DOI : http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.539

EN

Affiliation Information in DataCite Dataset Metadata: a Flemish Case Study

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author/Auteur : Niek Van Wettere

This article aims to evaluate how and to what extent metadata of datasets indexed in DataCite offer clear human- or machine-readable information that enables the research data to be linked to a particular research institution.

Two main pathways are explored. First, researchers can encode their affiliation information at the moment of data submission. This can be done by means of free-text metadata fields or via the inclusion of identifiers such as GRID/ROR and ORCID. Second, affiliation information can be traced indirectly through linking between a dataset and associated publications, given that the metadata of publications is often more explicit about affiliation information than the metadata of datasets.

Both pathways of affiliation information encoding are evaluated on the basis of metadata pertaining to datasets created at the five Flemish universities. It is shown that good practices such as encoding of affiliation information in a dedicated metadata field or inclusion of ORCID in the metadata are on the rise, but could be expanded further.

Finally, the establishment of links between datasets and related publications is often lacking in dataset metadata, although there are important differences between data repositories, as is also demonstrated in a more data-intensive follow-up analysis based on random samples of metadata records.

It is important that data repositories address this issue by providing a metadata field clearly dedicated to associated publications, prominently displayed on the landing page of the dataset.

URL : Affiliation Information in DataCite Dataset Metadata: a Flemish Case Study

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-013

EN

Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Guillaume Cabanac, Theodora Oikonomidi, Isabelle Boutron

Preprints promote the open and fast communication of non-peer reviewed work. Once a preprint is published in a peer-reviewed venue, the preprint server updates its web page: a prominent hyperlink leading to the newly published work is added.

Linking preprints to publications is of utmost importance as it provides readers with the latest version of a now certified work. Yet leading preprint servers fail to identify all existing preprint–publication links.

This limitation calls for a more thorough approach to this critical information retrieval task: overlooking published evidence translates into partial and even inaccurate systematic reviews on health-related issues, for instance.

We designed an algorithm leveraging the Crossref public and free source of bibliographic metadata to comb the literature for preprint–publication links. We tested it on a reference preprint set identified and curated for a living systematic review on interventions for preventing and treating COVID-19 performed by international collaboration: the COVID-NMA initiative (covid-nma.com).

The reference set comprised 343 preprints, 121 of which appeared as a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. While the preprint servers identified 39.7% of the preprint–publication links, our linker identified 90.9% of the expected links with no clues taken from the preprint servers.

The accuracy of the proposed linker is 91.5% on this reference set, with 90.9% sensitivity and 91.9% specificity. This is a 16.26% increase in accuracy compared to that of preprint servers. We release this software as supplementary material to foster its integration into preprint servers’ workflows and enhance a daily preprint–publication chase that is useful to all readers, including systematic reviewers.

This preprint–publication linker currently provides day-to-day updates to the biomedical experts of the COVID-NMA initiative.

URL : Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03900-7

FR

Crédibilité du chercheur, relation de confiance et éthique en recherche qualitative : l’implexité à la croisée des chemins

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : Bakary Doucouré

Cet article, élaboré à partir d’observations et d’expériences accumulées durant une quinzaine d’années dans le cadre de plusieurs recherches empiriques, analyse l’intérêt de la crédibilité du chercheur et de la relation de confiance dans un processus de recherche qualitative.

Il relève d’une démarche autoréflexive et introspective faisant émerger la place de l’implexité et le rôle essentiel de l’éthique dans le processus d’enquête qualitative, tout en permettant de mieux comprendre le lien entre les deux.

Aussi cet article s’inscrit de manière plus large dans les réflexions épistémologiques, méthodologiques et éthiques portant sur la recherche qualitative qui constituent des préoccupations à la fois constantes, évolutives et sans cesse renouvelées. Il est structuré autour de deux principaux axes.

D’une part, il aborde un ensemble de questions portant à la fois sur la crédibilité, la confiance, l’éthique et l’implexité, tout en indiquant des perspectives analytiques qui s’en dégagent.

D’autre part, à partir de l’analyse des données, l’article montre la relation entre l’implexité, la crédibilité et la confiance, mais aussi la dynamique de renforcement mutuel entre l’éthique et l’implexité.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/1076346ar

FR

La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des institutions d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteurs/Authors : Julie Hermesse, Audrey Vankeerberghen

Ce texte présente les principales questions et réflexions qui ont traversé la journée d’étude « La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des universités » organisée le 14 septembre 2018 à l’Université libre de Bruxelles.

La transdisciplinarité contribue aux transformations sociétales par la production d’un savoir hybride, à la fois scientifique et socialement pertinent. Si cela correspond aux missions de recherche et de service à la société prônées par les institutions académiques, force est de constater que la recherche transdisciplinaire ne s’y installe pas sans tension et ne bénéficie pas encore d’une légitimité reconnue.

Partant de ce constat, cette journée fut l’occasion de mettre en dialogue différents acteurs concernés par la transdisciplinarité afin de réfléchir aux enjeux propres à la mise en œuvre de ce mode de recherche dans les institutions académiques : financement, légitimité des connaissances produites ou encore modes de validation des carrières scientifiques.

Ces réflexions ont généré des débats, pointé des obstacles mais également actionné des leviers pour permettre la transition nécessaire au déploiement de la transdisciplinarité.

URL : La recherche transdisciplinaire au sein des institutions d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2021006

EN

Publication by association: how the COVID-19 pandemic has shown relationships between authors and editorial board members in the field of infectious diseases

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Clara Locher, David Moher, Ioana Alina Cristea, Florian Naudet

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the rush to scientific and political judgements on the merits of hydroxychloroquine was fuelled by dubious papers which may have been published because the authors were not independent from the practices of the journals in which they appeared.

This example leads us to consider a new type of illegitimate publishing entity, ‘self-promotion journals’ which could be deployed to serve the instrumentalisation of productivity-based metrics, with a ripple effect on decisions about promotion, tenure and grant funding, but also on the quality of manuscripts that are disseminated to the medical community and form the foundation of evidence-based medicine.

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111670

EN

Semantic micro-contributions with decentralized nanopublication services

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Tobias Kuhn, Ruben Taelman, Vincent Emonet, Haris Antonatos, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Michel Dumontier

While the publication of Linked Data has become increasingly common, the process tends to be a relatively complicated and heavy-weight one. Linked Data is typically published by centralized entities in the form of larger dataset releases, which has the downside that there is a central bottleneck in the form of the organization or individual responsible for the releases.

Moreover, certain kinds of data entries, in particular those with subjective or original content, currently do not fit into any existing dataset and are therefore more difficult to publish.

To address these problems, we present here an approach to use nanopublications and a decentralized network of services to allow users to directly publish small Linked Data statements through a simple and user-friendly interface, called Nanobench, powered by semantic templates that are themselves published as nanopublications.

The published nanopublications are cryptographically verifiable and can be queried through a redundant and decentralized network of services, based on the grlc API generator and a new quad extension of Triple Pattern Fragments.

We show here that these two kinds of services are complementary and together allow us to query nanopublications in a reliable and efficient manner. We also show that Nanobench makes it indeed very easy for users to publish Linked Data statements, even for those who have no prior experience in Linked Data publishing.

URL : Semantic micro-contributions with decentralized nanopublication services

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.387