InfoDoc MicroVeille – Page 279 – Veille dédiée aux Sciences de l'Information et des Bibliothèques // Collecting and Sharing research papers in Library and Information science ISSN 2429-3938

Harvesting the Academic Landscape: Streamlining the Ingestion of Professional Scholarship Metadata into the Institutional Repository

Posted on 6 février 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Jonathan Bull, Teresa Auch Schultz

INTRODUCTION

Although librarians initially hoped institutional repositories (IRs) would grow through researcher self-archiving, practice shows that growth is much more likely through library-directed deposit. Libraries must then find efficient ways to ingest material into their IR to ensure growth and relevance.

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

Valparaiso University developed and implemented a workflow that was semiautomated to help cut down on the time needed to ingest articles into its IR, ValpoScholar. The workflow, which continues to be refined, makes use of practices and ideas used by other repositories to more efficiently collect metadata for items and upload them to the repository.

NEXT STEPS

The article discusses the pros and cons of this workflow and areas of ingesting that still need to be addressed, including adding full-text items, checking copyright policies, managing student staffing, and dealing with hurdles created by the repository’s software.

URL : Harvesting the Academic Landscape: Streamlining the Ingestion of Professional Scholarship Metadata into the Institutional Repository

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2201

A scoping review of comparisons between abstracts and full reports in primary biomedical research

Posted on 5 février 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Guowei Li, Luciana P. F. Abbade, Ikunna Nwosu, Yanling Jin, Alvin Leenus, Muhammad Maaz, Mei Wang, Meha Bhatt, Laura Zielinski, Nitika Sanger, Bianca Bantoto, Candice Luo, Ieta Shams, Hamnah Shahid, Yaping Chang, Guangwen Sun, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Zainab Samaan, Mitchell A. H. Levine, Jonathan D. Adachi, Lehana Thabane

Background

Evidence shows that research abstracts are commonly inconsistent with their corresponding full reports, and may mislead readers.

In this scoping review, which is part of our series on the state of reporting of primary biomedical research, we summarized the evidence from systematic reviews and surveys, to investigate the current state of inconsistent abstract reporting, and to evaluate factors associated with improved reporting by comparing abstracts and their full reports.

Methods

We searched EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and CINAHL from January 1st 1996 to September 30th 2016 to retrieve eligible systematic reviews and surveys. Our primary outcome was the level of inconsistency between abstracts and corresponding full reports, which was expressed as a percentage (with a lower percentage indicating better reporting) or categorized rating (such as major/minor difference, high/medium/low inconsistency), as reported by the authors.

We used medians and interquartile ranges to describe the level of inconsistency across studies. No quantitative syntheses were conducted. Data from the included systematic reviews or surveys was summarized qualitatively.

Results

Seventeen studies that addressed this topic were included. The level of inconsistency was reported to have a median of 39% (interquartile range: 14% – 54%), and to range from 4% to 78%. In some studies that separated major from minor inconsistency, the level of major inconsistency ranged from 5% to 45% (median: 19%, interquartile range: 7% – 31%), which included discrepancies in specifying the study design or sample size, designating a primary outcome measure, presenting main results, and drawing a conclusion.

A longer time interval between conference abstracts and the publication of full reports was found to be the only factor which was marginally or significantly associated with increased likelihood of reporting inconsistencies.

Conclusions

This scoping review revealed that abstracts are frequently inconsistent with full reports, and efforts are needed to improve the consistency of abstract reporting in the primary biomedical community.

URL : A scoping review of comparisons between abstracts and full reports in primary biomedical research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0459-5

Exploring the feasibility of applying data mining for library reference service improvement : a case study of Turku Main Library

Posted on 5 février 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Ming Zhan

Data mining, as a heatedly discussed term, has been studied in various fields. Its possibilities in refining the decision-making process, realizing potential patterns and creating valuable knowledge have won attention of scholars and practitioners. However, there are less studies intending to combine data mining and libraries where data generation occurs all the time.

Therefore, this thesis plans to fill such a gap. Meanwhile, potential opportunities created by data mining are explored to enhance one of the most important elements of libraries: reference service. In order to thoroughly demonstrate the feasibility and applicability of data mining, literature is reviewed to establish a critical understanding of data mining in libraries and attain the current status of library reference service.

The result of the literature review indicates that free online data resources other than data generated on social media are rarely considered to be applied in current library data mining mandates. Therefore, the result of the literature review motivates the presented study to utilize online free resources. Furthermore, the natural match between data mining and libraries is established.

The natural match is explained by emphasizing the data richness reality and considering data mining as one kind of knowledge, an easy choice for libraries, and a wise method to overcome reference service challenges. The natural match, especially the aspect that data mining could be helpful for library reference service, lays the main theoretical foundation for the empirical work in this study.

Turku Main Library was selected as the case to answer the research question: whether data mining is feasible and applicable for reference service improvement. In this case, the daily visit from 2009 to 2015 in Turku Main Library is considered as the resource for data mining.

In addition, corresponding weather conditions are collected from Weather Underground, which is totally free online. Before officially being analyzed, the collected dataset is cleansed and preprocessed in order to ensure the quality of data mining.

Multiple regression analysis is employed to mine the final dataset. Hourly visits are the independent variable and weather conditions, Discomfort Index and seven days in a week are dependent variables. In the end, four models in different seasons are established to predict visiting situations in each season.

Patterns are realized in different seasons and implications are created based on the discovered patterns. In addition, library-climate points are generated by a clustering method, which simplifies the process for librarians using weather data to forecast library visiting situation. Then the data mining result is interpreted from the perspective of improving reference service.

After this data mining work, the result of the case study is presented to librarians so as to collect professional opinions regarding the possibility of employing data mining to improve reference services. In the end, positive opinions are collected, which implies that it is feasible to utilizing data mining as a tool to enhance library reference service.

URL : http://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/124215

Open Data Protection : Study on legal barriers to open data sharing – Data Protection and PSI

Posted on 2 février 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Andreas Wiebe, Nils Dietrich

This study analyses legal barriers to data sharing in the context of the Open Research Data Pilot, which the European Commission is running within its research framework programme Horizon2020.

In the first part of the study, data protection issues are analysed. After a brief overview of the international basis for data protection, the European legal framework is described in detail.

The main focus is thus on the Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC), which has been in force since 1995. Not only is the Data Protection Directive itself described, but also its implementation in selected EU Member States.

Additionally, the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation (2016/679/EU) and relevant changes are described. Special focus is placed on leading data protection principles. Next, the study describes the use of research data in the Open Research Data Pilot and how data protection principles influence such use.

The experiences of the European Commission in running the Open Research Data Pilot so far, as well as basic examples of repository use forms, are considered. The second part of the study analyses the extent to which legislation on public sector information (PSI) influences access to and re-use of research data.

The Public Sector Information Directive (2003/98/EC) and the impact of its revision in 2013 (2013/37/EU) are described. There is a special focus on the application of PSI legislation to public libraries, including university and research libraries, and its practical implications.

In the final part of the study the results are critically evaluated and core recommendations are made to improve the legal situation in relation to research data.

URL : Open Data Protection : Study on legal barriers to open data sharing – Data Protection and PSI

Connector, Catalyst and Common Good: Defining the Academic Library of the 21st Century

Posted on 1 février 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Janice Jaguszewski, Lisa A. McGuire

Clearly articulating how an academic library inspires and transforms teaching, learning and research is critical for library leadership. Conveying the library’s deep expertise throughout the knowledge lifecycle (discovery, use, creation, and sharing) and demonstrating its ability to provide solutions to information problems are core to what an academic library brings to campus collaborations.

At the University of Minnesota, the Health Sciences Libraries have developed a “Space as a Service” model of collaboration that positions them as a vital component of a larger Interprofessional Learning and Education Center within the University’s Academic Health Center.

We describe and discuss six fundamental principles that guide our vision of an academic library as a Connector, Catalyst, Common Good and Service-Rich Environment, and offer a template for applying this model to a range of disciplines.

URL : https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/article/view/7227

Opening Academic Publishing – Development and application of systematic evaluation criteria

Posted on 31 janvier 2018 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Anna Björk, Juho-Matti Paavola, Teemu Ropponen, Mikael Laakso, Leo Lahti

This report summarizes the development of a standardized scorecard for evaluating the openness of academic publishers. The assessment was completed in January 2018 as part of the Open Science and Research Initiative of the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture.

The project complements the previous reports published by the Open Science and Research Initiative and the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture, which have covered (i) the openness of universities and polytechnics, (ii) the overall situation of OA publishing costs in Finland, and (iii) research organization and research funding organizations, including selected European research funders.

The project mapped and evaluated the openness of selected major academic publishers: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), American Chemical Society (ACS), Elsevier, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering (IEEE), Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins (LWW), Sage, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley-Blackwell. The dimensions of publisher openness were summarized in a scorecard of seven key factors, providing a new tool for systematic and standardized evaluation.

We used data from the publisher websites to compare the key factors of openness, and the publishers were given a chance to provide comments on the collected information. As complementary sources, we utilized data from commonly acknowledged, open databases: Directory of OA Journals (DOAJ), Gold OA Journals 2011-2016 (GOAJ2), Scopus (title list + Scimago), and Sherpa / Romeo.

The main results include the scorecard and the evaluation of openness of the selected major academic publishers. These are based on seven key factors: (i) Fraction of open access (OA) journals and their articles of the total publication output, (ii) costs of OA publishing (article processing charges, APC), (iii) use of Creative Commons (CC) licensing, (iv) self-archiving policies, (v) access to text and data mining (TDM), (vi) openness of citation data, and (vii) accessibility of information relating to OA practices.

To take a look beyond the publisher level into journal level practices we also sampled individual journals. We use the samples to discuss the distribution of journals according to APCs, their licensing and three impact metrics (CiteScore 2016, Scimago Journal & Country Ranks (SJR) 2016, and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016).

The evaluation of the selected publishers with the scorecard indicates, for example, that the fraction of OA journals and their articles of the total publication output runs low within this group. In our sample of journals, the most expensive OA journals also seem to bear the highest impact metrics.

A definite view on the matter, however, would require more extensive data and further research. We
conclude by discussing key aspects and complexities in quantitative evaluation and in the design of a standardized assessment of publisher openness, and note also further factors that could be included in future versions of the scorecard.

URL : Opening Academic Publishing – Development and application of systematic evaluation criteria

Alternative location : https://avointiede.fi/documents/10864/12232/OPENING+ACADEMIC+PUBLISHING+.pdf/a4358f81-88cf-4915-92db-88335092c992