The evolution of scholarly communications has accelerated in recent years, and 2020 for obvious reasons put even more pressure on the sector to evolve and adapt. By opening up access to research publications, by simplifying or customising the digital experience, or by improving the speed of publishing – the focus is firmly placed on the need for publishers to work more in partnership with each other, with institutions, funders, and new players in the market to develop solutions that meet the evolving needs of researchers and the wider community. Partnerships between different actors in the research process address challenges in practice and help advance open science, publishing, and the research system as a whole.
{"title":"Opening doors to discovery: Partnerships are key to advancing open science","authors":"F. Peeters","doi":"10.3233/isu-210105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-210105","url":null,"abstract":"The evolution of scholarly communications has accelerated in recent years, and 2020 for obvious reasons put even more pressure on the sector to evolve and adapt. By opening up access to research publications, by simplifying or customising the digital experience, or by improving the speed of publishing – the focus is firmly placed on the need for publishers to work more in partnership with each other, with institutions, funders, and new players in the market to develop solutions that meet the evolving needs of researchers and the wider community. Partnerships between different actors in the research process address challenges in practice and help advance open science, publishing, and the research system as a whole.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"136 1","pages":"171-176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77022960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A critical component in the development of sustainable funding models for Open Access (OA) is the ability to communicate impact in ways that are meaningful to a diverse range of internal and external stakeholders, including institutional partners, funders, and authors. While traditional paywall publishers can take advantage of industry standard COUNTER reports to communicate usage to subscribing libraries, no similar standard exists for OA content. Instead, many organizations are stuck with proxy metrics like sessions and page views that struggle to discriminate between robotic access and genuine engagement. This paper presents the results of an innovative project that builds on existing COUNTER metrics to develop more flexible reporting. Reporting goals include surfacing third party engagement with OA content, the use of graphical report formats to improve accessibility, the ability to assemble custom data dashboards, and configurations that support the variant needs of diverse stakeholders. We’ll be sharing our understanding of who the stakeholders are, their differing needs for analytics, feedback on the reports shared, lessons learned, and areas for future research in this evolving area.
{"title":"Next generation Open Access analytics: A case study","authors":"Tim Lloyd, S. Rouhi","doi":"10.3233/isu-210106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-210106","url":null,"abstract":"A critical component in the development of sustainable funding models for Open Access (OA) is the ability to communicate impact in ways that are meaningful to a diverse range of internal and external stakeholders, including institutional partners, funders, and authors. While traditional paywall publishers can take advantage of industry standard COUNTER reports to communicate usage to subscribing libraries, no similar standard exists for OA content. Instead, many organizations are stuck with proxy metrics like sessions and page views that struggle to discriminate between robotic access and genuine engagement. This paper presents the results of an innovative project that builds on existing COUNTER metrics to develop more flexible reporting. Reporting goals include surfacing third party engagement with OA content, the use of graphical report formats to improve accessibility, the ability to assemble custom data dashboards, and configurations that support the variant needs of diverse stakeholders. We’ll be sharing our understanding of who the stakeholders are, their differing needs for analytics, feedback on the reports shared, lessons learned, and areas for future research in this evolving area.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"46 1","pages":"99-105"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88000065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The way science is done is changing. While some tools are facilitating this change, others lag behind. The resulting mismatch between tools and researchers’ workflows can be inefficient and delay the progress of research. As an example, information about the people associated with a published journal article was traditionally handled manually and unsystematically. However, as large-scale collaboration, sometimes referred to as “team science”, is now common, a more structured and easy-to-automate approach to managing meta-data is required. In the present paper, we describe how the latest version of tenzing (Holcombe et al., 2020) helps researchers collect and structure contributor information efficiently and without frustration. Using tenzing as an example, we discuss the importance of efficient tools to reforming science and our experience with tool development as researchers.
科学研究的方式正在改变。虽然一些工具正在促进这种变化，但其他工具却落后了。工具和研究人员的工作流程之间的不匹配会导致效率低下，并延迟研究的进展。例如，与发表的期刊文章相关的人的信息传统上是手工和非系统地处理的。然而，随着大规模协作(有时被称为“团队科学”)的普及，需要一种更加结构化和易于自动化的方法来管理元数据。在本文中，我们描述了最新版本的tenzing (Holcombe et al.， 2020)如何帮助研究人员有效且无挫折地收集和构建贡献者信息。以tenzing为例，我们讨论了高效工具对科学改革的重要性以及我们作为研究人员在工具开发方面的经验。
{"title":"Tenzing and the importance of tool development for research efficiency","authors":"Márton Kovács, A. Holcombe, F. Aust, B. Aczel","doi":"10.31222/osf.io/m4za9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/m4za9","url":null,"abstract":"The way science is done is changing. While some tools are facilitating this change, others lag behind. The resulting mismatch between tools and researchers’ workflows can be inefficient and delay the progress of research. As an example, information about the people associated with a published journal article was traditionally handled manually and unsystematically. However, as large-scale collaboration, sometimes referred to as “team science”, is now common, a more structured and easy-to-automate approach to managing meta-data is required. In the present paper, we describe how the latest version of tenzing (Holcombe et al., 2020) helps researchers collect and structure contributor information efficiently and without frustration. Using tenzing as an example, we discuss the importance of efficient tools to reforming science and our experience with tool development as researchers.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"25 1","pages":"123-130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81848355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-09DOI: 10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34f
Lauren Kane
Will the events of 2020 lead to innovation or stagnation? At the onset of 2021, with a slow and difficult recovery from the global pandemic on the horizon, organizations throughout scholarly communications faced a strategic crossroads. Would they use this time to pursue new ideas, models, and programs that combatted losses and enhanced their missions? Or, desiring stability and security, not additional risk, would they stay the existing course? This opinion piece explores the scholarly communications community’s resilience during the global pandemic, how recent history shaped this response, and what this may mean for the future.
{"title":"Reinvention or return to 'normal'? Scholarly communications at a crossroads","authors":"Lauren Kane","doi":"10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34f","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34f","url":null,"abstract":"Will the events of 2020 lead to innovation or stagnation? At the onset of 2021, with a slow and difficult recovery from the global pandemic on the horizon, organizations throughout scholarly communications faced a strategic crossroads. Would they use this time to pursue new ideas, models, and programs that combatted losses and enhanced their missions? Or, desiring stability and security, not additional risk, would they stay the existing course? This opinion piece explores the scholarly communications community’s resilience during the global pandemic, how recent history shaped this response, and what this may mean for the future.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"303 1","pages":"177-181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77493983","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-07DOI: 10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34d
D. Wagner
While it is yet too early to assess the exact proportions and repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, it seems undeniable to me that it does have a historic dimension. There will be many respects in which future historians will divide epochs in a “before” and an “after Corona”. One of those respects in which COVID-19 is a game changer is the role of science in society. Never before has the global reaction to a devastating catastrophe been so crucially dependent on the speed and success of scientific research. Politicians in many countries let it be known that scientific results were essential for their decision making. Science-related news were consistently in the headlines for much of the year 2020, at times even outshining reports on the acrimonious fight for the US presidency. At the Council for Sciences and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat), we have immediately begun to ask ourselves what this new level of attention, and the pressure which it exerts on a number of scientific fields, mean for science as a system. At first sight, this might seem an almost frivolous question to ask. Is this not a Kennedy moment, a moment best captured in the famous quote from John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” And indeed, in asking what the pandemic means for science, at the Council we are not asking whether it is good or bad for science; we are asking what it tells us about science. As has been noted by many people before, the health crisis and its social and economic repercussions have had such an enormous impact on virtually every part of our social and economic systems that we can consider it a kind of natural experiment. The year 2020 laid bare strengths and weaknesses of our societies. And it also laid bare strengths and weaknesses of our system of science, which became visible as if viewed under a magnifying glass. We should not miss the opportunity to learn from that. Not all of us are involved in the immediate response to the crisis. Those of us who are not should pay close attention. We should prepare for a speedy recovery, and we should start thinking about how we can improve the system. For many of the weaknesses and defects that became visible during the pandemic are not easily mended, but will take years of hard work to repair, reconstruct, and redesign. As an advisory body that assists the federal government and state governments in Germany with reports and recommendations on the organisation and funding of research
虽然现在评估COVID-19大流行的确切规模和影响还为时过早，但我似乎不可否认，它确实具有历史意义。未来的历史学家将在许多方面把时代划分为“科罗娜之前”和“之后”。COVID-19改变游戏规则的一个方面是科学在社会中的作用。全球对一场毁灭性灾难的反应从未如此关键地依赖于科学研究的速度和成功。许多国家的政治家让人们知道，科学结果对他们的决策至关重要。在2020年的大部分时间里，与科学相关的新闻一直占据头条，有时甚至超过了美国总统竞选的激烈竞争。在科学与人文委员会，我们立即开始问自己，这种新的关注水平，以及它对许多科学领域施加的压力，对科学作为一个系统意味着什么。乍一看，这似乎是一个近乎无聊的问题。这不是肯尼迪的时刻吗?约翰·f·肯尼迪(John F. Kennedy)就职演说中的一句名言最能体现这一时刻:“不要问你的国家能为你做些什么，而要问你能为你的国家做些什么。”事实上，在理事会上，我们在询问大流行对科学意味着什么时，并不是在问它对科学是好是坏;我们问的是它告诉我们关于科学的什么。正如许多人以前所指出的那样，卫生危机及其社会和经济影响对我们社会和经济制度的几乎每一个部分都产生了如此巨大的影响，我们可以将其视为一种自然实验。2020年暴露了我们社会的优势和劣势。它也暴露了我们科学体系的优点和缺点，就像在放大镜下观察一样清晰可见。我们不应错过从中吸取教训的机会。并非我们所有人都参与了对危机的即时反应。我们当中那些没有的人应该密切关注。我们应该为快速复苏做好准备，我们应该开始思考如何改进这个系统。因为在大流行期间暴露出来的许多弱点和缺陷不容易弥补，而是需要多年的艰苦工作来修复、重建和重新设计。作为一个咨询机构，协助德国联邦政府和州政府就研究的组织和资助提出报告和建议
{"title":"Open and autonomous. The basis for trust in science","authors":"D. Wagner","doi":"10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34d","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26226/morressier.5fd757103d762219be34f34d","url":null,"abstract":"While it is yet too early to assess the exact proportions and repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, it seems undeniable to me that it does have a historic dimension. There will be many respects in which future historians will divide epochs in a “before” and an “after Corona”. One of those respects in which COVID-19 is a game changer is the role of science in society. Never before has the global reaction to a devastating catastrophe been so crucially dependent on the speed and success of scientific research. Politicians in many countries let it be known that scientific results were essential for their decision making. Science-related news were consistently in the headlines for much of the year 2020, at times even outshining reports on the acrimonious fight for the US presidency. At the Council for Sciences and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat), we have immediately begun to ask ourselves what this new level of attention, and the pressure which it exerts on a number of scientific fields, mean for science as a system. At first sight, this might seem an almost frivolous question to ask. Is this not a Kennedy moment, a moment best captured in the famous quote from John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” And indeed, in asking what the pandemic means for science, at the Council we are not asking whether it is good or bad for science; we are asking what it tells us about science. As has been noted by many people before, the health crisis and its social and economic repercussions have had such an enormous impact on virtually every part of our social and economic systems that we can consider it a kind of natural experiment. The year 2020 laid bare strengths and weaknesses of our societies. And it also laid bare strengths and weaknesses of our system of science, which became visible as if viewed under a magnifying glass. We should not miss the opportunity to learn from that. Not all of us are involved in the immediate response to the crisis. Those of us who are not should pay close attention. We should prepare for a speedy recovery, and we should start thinking about how we can improve the system. For many of the weaknesses and defects that became visible during the pandemic are not easily mended, but will take years of hard work to repair, reconstruct, and redesign. As an advisory body that assists the federal government and state governments in Germany with reports and recommendations on the organisation and funding of research","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"134 1","pages":"163-169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77390266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, I tell about the key findings and action points from the Global sustainable development report 2019 – Future is Now (GSDR2019) - and raise, based on the report, messages and recommendations for the academic publishing community for consideration and action. The Agenda2030 for sustainable development was signed by all UN member countries in 2015. It is an ambitious political framework to transform the world into a safe and just place. Based on the GSDR2019, only little progress had taken place until 2019. To speed up the progress in a way that makes durable changes towards sustainable development, there is a need to identify the interlinkages between the various goals and targets and push transformation in six key societal systems side by side. To make this happen, four types of levers need to work in an integrated manner. To ensure this, universal science capacity is required, with an emphasis on sustainability science. The academic publishers play an important role here. Open access, searchable databases and syntheses are highly needed.
{"title":"The big leap: How to move from what is agreed and done to what needs to happen","authors":"E. Furman","doi":"10.3233/isu-200077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-200077","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I tell about the key findings and action points from the Global sustainable development report 2019 – Future is Now (GSDR2019) - and raise, based on the report, messages and recommendations for the academic publishing community for consideration and action. The Agenda2030 for sustainable development was signed by all UN member countries in 2015. It is an ambitious political framework to transform the world into a safe and just place. Based on the GSDR2019, only little progress had taken place until 2019. To speed up the progress in a way that makes durable changes towards sustainable development, there is a need to identify the interlinkages between the various goals and targets and push transformation in six key societal systems side by side. To make this happen, four types of levers need to work in an integrated manner. To ensure this, universal science capacity is required, with an emphasis on sustainability science. The academic publishers play an important role here. Open access, searchable databases and syntheses are highly needed.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"181 1","pages":"313-318"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75192721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
At the APE 2020 Pre-Conference in Berlin, a group of talent development and HR experts from across the scientific research and publishing community came together to discuss the future of talent development in the scholarly publishing industry. We heard from an excellent group of speakers who shared with us a rich and diverse range of expertise and experience. We set ourselves the challenge of imagining what the world of scholarly academic publishing would look like in 2030, and asked ourselves the question: how can we work together to develop the talent we will need now, and for the future, in a rapidly changing world? Are we keeping pace, and are we prepared for the challenge ahead? Based on our discussion, three key themes emerged: the importance of supporting increased diversity & inclusion within scholarly publishing, interorganizational leadership development initiatives for leaders across the publishing ecosystem to exchange experiences and ideas, and greater research and publishing career mobility to encourage more fluid movement between research and publishing jobs. We believe these things are all very achievable if we commit to investing in the kind of culture change and new ways of thinking that will lead us to success in 2030.
{"title":"Publishing is evolving, but are we? Developing talent for the future","authors":"A. J. Miller","doi":"10.3233/isu-200073","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-200073","url":null,"abstract":"At the APE 2020 Pre-Conference in Berlin, a group of talent development and HR experts from across the scientific research and publishing community came together to discuss the future of talent development in the scholarly publishing industry. We heard from an excellent group of speakers who shared with us a rich and diverse range of expertise and experience. We set ourselves the challenge of imagining what the world of scholarly academic publishing would look like in 2030, and asked ourselves the question: how can we work together to develop the talent we will need now, and for the future, in a rapidly changing world? Are we keeping pace, and are we prepared for the challenge ahead? Based on our discussion, three key themes emerged: the importance of supporting increased diversity & inclusion within scholarly publishing, interorganizational leadership development initiatives for leaders across the publishing ecosystem to exchange experiences and ideas, and greater research and publishing career mobility to encourage more fluid movement between research and publishing jobs. We believe these things are all very achievable if we commit to investing in the kind of culture change and new ways of thinking that will lead us to success in 2030.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"103 1","pages":"329-331"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80638149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reports on the outcome of a project launched in September 2019 to develop an approach to implementing the price transparency principle of Plan S. It was clear from the outset that mobilising stakeholder engagement and support would be crucial to success. It was also clear that this would be a challenge. While funders, libraries, and library consortia were broadly supportive of the work, many publishers – both mixed model and OA-only – expressed significant concerns. A framework consisting of title, contextual, and price metadata emerged and is described within.
{"title":"Price transparency project: Informing the development of Plan S","authors":"A. Wise, Lorraine Estelle","doi":"10.3233/isu-200079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-200079","url":null,"abstract":"This article reports on the outcome of a project launched in September 2019 to develop an approach to implementing the price transparency principle of Plan S. It was clear from the outset that mobilising stakeholder engagement and support would be crucial to success. It was also clear that this would be a challenge. While funders, libraries, and library consortia were broadly supportive of the work, many publishers – both mixed model and OA-only – expressed significant concerns. A framework consisting of title, contextual, and price metadata emerged and is described within.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"41 1","pages":"319-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77291250","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Vision 2030: Made in China?","authors":"Michael Mabe","doi":"10.3233/isu-200078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-200078","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"455 1","pages":"299-305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79628973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tracking and understanding the impact of research is important to funders, publishers, and researchers. But the process of doing so is full of pain points – from the time it takes to apply for a grant and report on it, to the often poor data quality of the information being collected, and the challenge of keeping track of researchers and their research over time. The ORCID Funder Working Group recently analyzed these pain points and published their recommendations for using persistent identifiers to help address these challenges. In this article, you will learn more about persistent identifiers for researchers, publications, and grants and about what each stakeholder group can do to reduce the burden and improve the transparency of the process – from applying for a grant to publishing the research results.
{"title":"Improving funding and publishing workflows with PIDs","authors":"Gabriela Mejias","doi":"10.3233/isu-200074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-200074","url":null,"abstract":"Tracking and understanding the impact of research is important to funders, publishers, and researchers. But the process of doing so is full of pain points – from the time it takes to apply for a grant and report on it, to the often poor data quality of the information being collected, and the challenge of keeping track of researchers and their research over time. The ORCID Funder Working Group recently analyzed these pain points and published their recommendations for using persistent identifiers to help address these challenges. In this article, you will learn more about persistent identifiers for researchers, publications, and grants and about what each stakeholder group can do to reduce the burden and improve the transparency of the process – from applying for a grant to publishing the research results.","PeriodicalId":39698,"journal":{"name":"Information Services and Use","volume":"75 1","pages":"307-311"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86022903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：