january 13, 2016 niso webinar: ensuring the scholarly record: scholarly retractions, scientific...

41

Upload: devonne-parks-cem

Post on 13-Jan-2017

833 views

Category:

Education


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 2: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Trust Through Transparency

Kirsty Meddings@kmeddings

NISO Webinar: Ensuring the scholarly record. January 13th 2016

Page 3: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 4: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

infrastructure |ˈɪnfrəstrʌktʃə|

nounthe basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g. buildings, roads, power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise. the social and economic infrastructure of a country.

Oxford Dictionary of English

Page 5: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

<metadata>

Page 6: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 7: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Building trust in your content

•Who contributed to this research?• (And what other research have they been involved in?)

• Is it original?•Has it been updated?•How was it peer-reviewed?•What can I do with it?

Page 8: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Who contributed to this research?

Author: K. Meddings

Page 9: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9205-2956

Who contributed to this?

Page 10: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

DOI DOIDOI

What else have they written?

Page 11: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Crossref metadata

DOI DOIDOI

Page 12: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Crossref metadata

DOI DOIDOI

Page 13: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 14: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

What else have they written?

Page 15: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

CRediT Taxonomy & Open Badges

Page 16: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Who funded the research?

Page 17: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Who funded the research?

Page 18: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Crossref funding data (previously FundRef)

Standardisation of funder names using the Open Funder Registry

Publisher deposit of funding metadata

Large-scale analysis and reporting to funders

Page 19: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

http://search.crossref.org/fundref

Page 20: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 21: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 22: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

http://api.crossref.org

Page 23: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

http://api.crossref.org

Page 24: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 25: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Is it original?

Page 26: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

CrossCheck

iThenticate software to analyse and compare text

Database of relevant content to compare text against

Page 27: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

CrossCheck

700 Crossref member publishers using CrossCheck

Screening against database of 44 million content items

270,000 manuscripts checked each month

Page 28: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Has it been updated?erratumcorrigendumcorrectionwithdrawalretractionnew editionexpression of concernpartial retractionremovaladdendumclarification

Page 29: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Has it been updated?

Page 30: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Has it been updated?

Page 31: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

CrossMark metadata

Freely available at api.crossref.org

• 275,000 DOIs with CrossMarks• 26,000 are correction notices• 950 are retraction notices

Page 32: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

CrossMark metadata

Freely available at api.crossref.org

• 275,000 DOIs with CrossMarks• 26,000 are correction notices• 950 are retraction notices

Page 33: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Was it peer-reviewed? How?

Page 34: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Publication history

Copyright statements

ORCIDs

Aims & Scope

A wealth of additional metadata

Links to datasets

Originality screening

Supplementary materials

And more…

Page 35: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 36: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Linked Clinical Trials pilot

• Deposit of registered clinical trial numbers (CTNs) referenced in articles

• Links to other articles that also reference the same CTN

• Pre-results, results, post-results

• Display and navigation within CrossMark

Page 37: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries
Page 38: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Linked Clinical Trials pilot

● BMJ● PLOS● ISRCTN● eLife● F1000● The Lancet● Wiley/Cochrane● BioMed Central● CMAJ● Wellcome● Elsevier

Page 39: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

What can I do with it?

Share & adapt for any purposewith appropriate credit

Page 40: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Call to action!

Publishers already have all of this valuable information

Add it to your metadata and get it out there

Give the reader enough information to make a sound judgement

Let other people and systems use it to research trends, build tools and drive traffic

Page 41: January 13, 2016 NISO Webinar: Ensuring the Scholarly Record: Scholarly Retractions, Scientific Reproducibility, and the Role of Publishers and Libraries

Thank [email protected]@kmeddings