This week, we signpost the inaugural webinar in a new series from PLOS. We read about the work that DOAJ is doing to uphold trust in the scholarly publishing process and reflect on EMWA’s symposium on AI in medical writing. We also explore how to overcome barriers to societal engagement in open science policy and consider whom research articles should be read by if they are to help address the UN SDGs. Finally, we read about new requirements for prospective registration of systematic reviews and meta-analyses from Taylor & Francis’ Expert Collection.
To engage with:
Open 2.0: new PLOS webinar series via PLOS
Join PLOS on 21 June for the inaugural webinar in its new Open 2.0 series. This webinar, titled How open bibliometrics can reshape scholarly communications, will examine OpenAlex’s institutional partnerships to demonstrate the impact of embracing open bibliometric tools.
To read:
DOAJ: upholding trust in scholarly publishing via The Scholarly Kitchen | 10-minute read
With research misconduct seemingly on the rise, upholding trust in the quality of scholarly publications is more important than ever. In this article, Cenyu Shen (Deputy Head of Editorial [Quality] at DOAJ) and Joanna Ball (Managing Director of DOAJ) explore how the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is working to combat waning trust in the publishing ecosystem.
EMWA AI symposium summaries via The Publication Plan | 15-minute read
Artificial intelligence (AI) has many practical applications in the field of medical writing. On 9 May, the 12th European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) symposium allowed attendees to explore all aspects of AI in medical writing, including intellectual property implications, ethical challenges and the importance of human oversight. Summaries of all morning and afternoon sessions from the symposium are now available.
Open science and society via The Royal Society | 45-minute read
How can we overcome the barriers preventing societal engagement in open science? In this article, authors of the UNESCO Open Science guidance on Engaging societal actors in open science explore just that! Through reflection on the scholarly underpinnings of the guidance, the authors present a pathway to transform existing local and national science policies into proactive open science policies.
Whom are research publications really for? via The Scholarly Kitchen | 9-minute read
“Research publications have the power to change the world”, but are perceptions about interest and readership limiting their impact? In this article, Charlie Rapple (Co-founder of Kudos) explores how publishers can expand the reach of their research articles to better address global challenges such as meeting the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Prospective registration required for T&F’s Expert Collection via Taylor & Francis | 2-minute read
The Taylor & Francis Expert Collection journals will no longer consider systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have not been prospectively registered. The move aims to improve review robustness and transparency by allowing comparison of the registered study design with the study design reported in the submitted manuscript. If you wish to discuss manuscripts that have not been prospectively registered and want to find out more about alternative publication outlets, please contact Taylor & Francis.
Enjoy our content? Read last week’s digest and check out our latest guest blog!
Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter/X and LinkedIn for regular updates!
