Data journals provide strong incentives for data creators to verify, document and disseminate their data. They also bring data access and documentation into the mainstream of scholarly communication, rewarding data creators through existing mechanisms of peer-reviewed publication and citation tracking. These same advantages are not generally associated with data repositories, or with conventional journals’ data-sharing mandates. This article describes the unique advantages of data journals. It also examines the data journal landscape, presenting the characteristics of 13 data journals in the fields of biology, environmental science, chemistry, medicine and health sciences. These journals vary considerably in size, scope, publisher characteristics, length of data reports, data hosting policies, time from submission to first decision, article processing charges, bibliographic index coverage and citation impact. They are similar, however, in their peer review criteria, their open access license terms and the characteristics of their editorial boards.
{"title":"Data journals: incentivizing data access and documentation within the scholarly communication system","authors":"W. H. Walters","doi":"10.1629/uksg.510","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.510","url":null,"abstract":"Data journals provide strong incentives for data creators to verify, document and disseminate their data. They also bring data access and documentation into the mainstream of scholarly communication, rewarding data creators through existing mechanisms of peer-reviewed publication and citation tracking. These same advantages are not generally associated with data repositories, or with conventional journals’ data-sharing mandates. This article describes the unique advantages of data journals. It also examines the data journal landscape, presenting the characteristics of 13 data journals in the fields of biology, environmental science, chemistry, medicine and health sciences. These journals vary considerably in size, scope, publisher characteristics, length of data reports, data hosting policies, time from submission to first decision, article processing charges, bibliographic index coverage and citation impact. They are similar, however, in their peer review criteria, their open access license terms and the characteristics of their editorial boards.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48419117","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}
Jennifer Bayjoo, Dominic Broadhurst, D. clay, Emma L. Smith
This article presents a range of perspectives on the current state of the scholarly communications sector through the lens of a research-informed university, beginning with a short overview of research at the University of Salford and followed by our assessment of what we feel is working, and indeed not working, with the current system. Based on this, we assess what we feel are the current barriers to change and both how these can be overcome and what we are doing to overcome them. Finally, we provide some commentary on what we feel is the changing open access paradigm and where all this should take us next.
{"title":"The view from Salford: perspectives on scholarly communications from a research-informed university","authors":"Jennifer Bayjoo, Dominic Broadhurst, D. clay, Emma L. Smith","doi":"10.1629/uksg.511","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.511","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a range of perspectives on the current state of the scholarly communications sector through the lens of a research-informed university, beginning with a short overview of research at the University of Salford and followed by our assessment of what we feel is working, and indeed not working, with the current system. Based on this, we assess what we feel are the current barriers to change and both how these can be overcome and what we are doing to overcome them. Finally, we provide some commentary on what we feel is the changing open access paradigm and where all this should take us next.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44241975","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}
Writing is storytelling. In this article I share my story on how I began (and continue) to write for academic publication. Hopefully, you, the reader, will get some ideas from my experiences and suggestions and will feel motivated and enthused to write yourself. I have included some writing exercises that those new to writing may find helpful.
{"title":"The librarian as academic author: a reflection","authors":"H. Fallon","doi":"10.1629/uksg.505","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.505","url":null,"abstract":"Writing is storytelling. In this article I share my story on how I began (and continue) to write for academic publication. Hopefully, you, the reader, will get some ideas from my experiences and suggestions and will feel motivated and enthused to write yourself. I have included some writing exercises that those new to writing may find helpful.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48037525","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}
Niccole Leilanionapae‘aina Coggins, G. Fosado, Christie Henry, Gita Manaktala
This article provides an overview of the ways in which the members of the Association of University Presses are working towards more inclusive practices in scholarly publishing. The authors consider the Mellon University Press Diversity Fellowship Program (now in its fourth year), the work of the Association’s Diversity and Inclusion Task Force, the Gender, Equity and Cultures of Respect Task Force and the new Equity, Justice and Inclusion Committee. They also look at press-based working groups and several ‘Toolkits for Equity’ that are currently in development. The volunteers engaged in these and other efforts are working to document how bias has shaped universities and university presses, to propose actions to disrupt this powerful force and to share what they have learned with their colleagues as well as with the larger scholarly publishing and academic communities.
{"title":"Towards inclusive scholarly publishing: developments in the university press community","authors":"Niccole Leilanionapae‘aina Coggins, G. Fosado, Christie Henry, Gita Manaktala","doi":"10.1629/uksg.506","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.506","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides an overview of the ways in which the members of the Association of University Presses are working towards more inclusive practices in scholarly publishing. The authors consider the Mellon University Press Diversity Fellowship Program (now in its fourth year), the work of the Association’s Diversity and Inclusion Task Force, the Gender, Equity and Cultures of Respect Task Force and the new Equity, Justice and Inclusion Committee. They also look at press-based working groups and several ‘Toolkits for Equity’ that are currently in development. The volunteers engaged in these and other efforts are working to document how bias has shaped universities and university presses, to propose actions to disrupt this powerful force and to share what they have learned with their colleagues as well as with the larger scholarly publishing and academic communities.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42251639","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 its first 30 years the world wide web has revolutionized the information environment. However, its impact has been negative as well as positive, through corporate misuse of personal data and due to its potential for enabling the spread of disinformation. As a large-scale collaborative platform funded through charitable donations, with a mission to provide universal free access to knowledge as a public good, Wikipedia is one of the most popular websites in the world. This paper explores the role of Wikipedia in the information ecosystem where it occupies a unique role as a bridge between informal discussion and scholarly publication. We explore how it relates to the broader Wikimedia ecosystem, through structured data on Wikidata for instance, and openly licensed media on Wikimedia Commons. We consider the potential benefits for universities in the areas of information literacy and research impact, and investigate the extent to which universities in the UK and their libraries are engaging strategically with Wikimedia, if at all.
{"title":"Wikimedia and universities: contributing to the global commons in the Age of Disinformation","authors":"Nick Sheppard, M. Poulter","doi":"10.1629/uksg.509","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.509","url":null,"abstract":"In its first 30 years the world wide web has revolutionized the information environment. However, its impact has been negative as well as positive, through corporate misuse of personal data and due to its potential for enabling the spread of disinformation. As a large-scale collaborative platform funded through charitable donations, with a mission to provide universal free access to knowledge as a public good, Wikipedia is one of the most popular websites in the world. This paper explores the role of Wikipedia in the information ecosystem where it occupies a unique role as a bridge between informal discussion and scholarly publication. We explore how it relates to the broader Wikimedia ecosystem, through structured data on Wikidata for instance, and openly licensed media on Wikimedia Commons. We consider the potential benefits for universities in the areas of information literacy and research impact, and investigate the extent to which universities in the UK and their libraries are engaging strategically with Wikimedia, if at all.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87782548","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}
Lisa Olsson, C. Lindelöw, Lovisa Österlund, Frida Jakobsson
This article covers the consequences of the decision of the Bibsam consortium to cancel its journal licence agreement with Elsevier, the world’s largest scholarly publisher, in 2018. First, we report on how the cancellation affected Swedish researchers. Second, we describe other consequences of the cancellation. Finally, we report on lessons for the future. In short, there was no consensus among researchers on how the cancellation affected them or whether the cancellation was positive or negative for them. Just over half (54%) of the 4,221 researchers who responded to a survey indicated that the cancellation had harmed their work, whereas 37% indicated that it had not. Almost half (48%) of the researchers had a negative view of the cancellation, whereas 38% had a positive view. The cancellation highlighted the ongoing work at research libraries to facilitate the transition to an open access publishing system to more stakeholders in academia than before. It also showed that Swedish vice-chancellors were prepared to suspend subscriptions with a publisher that could not accommodate the needs and requirements of open science. Finally, the cancellation resulted in the signing of a transformative agreement which started on 1 January 2020. If it had not been for the cancellation, the reaching of such an agreement would have been unlikely.
{"title":"Cancelling with the world’s largest scholarly publisher: lessons from the Swedish experience of having no access to Elsevier","authors":"Lisa Olsson, C. Lindelöw, Lovisa Österlund, Frida Jakobsson","doi":"10.1629/uksg.507","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.507","url":null,"abstract":"This article covers the consequences of the decision of the Bibsam consortium to cancel its journal licence agreement with Elsevier, the world’s largest scholarly publisher, in 2018. First, we report on how the cancellation affected Swedish researchers. Second, we describe other consequences of the cancellation. Finally, we report on lessons for the future. In short, there was no consensus among researchers on how the cancellation affected them or whether the cancellation was positive or negative for them. Just over half (54%) of the 4,221 researchers who responded to a survey indicated that the cancellation had harmed their work, whereas 37% indicated that it had not. Almost half (48%) of the researchers had a negative view of the cancellation, whereas 38% had a positive view. The cancellation highlighted the ongoing work at research libraries to facilitate the transition to an open access publishing system to more stakeholders in academia than before. It also showed that Swedish vice-chancellors were prepared to suspend subscriptions with a publisher that could not accommodate the needs and requirements of open science. Finally, the cancellation resulted in the signing of a transformative agreement which started on 1 January 2020. If it had not been for the cancellation, the reaching of such an agreement would have been unlikely.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42541882","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 explores the community reach and societal impact of institutional repositories, in particular Griffith Research Online (GRO), Griffith University’s institutional repository. To promote research on GRO, and to encourage people to click through to the repository content, a pilot social media campaign and some subsequent smaller social media activities were undertaken in 2018. After briefly touching on these campaigns, this article provides some reflections from these activities and proposes options for the future direction of social engagement and GRO in particular, and for institutional repositories in general. This undertaking necessitates a shift in focus from repositories as a resource for the scholarly community to a resource for the community at large. The campaign also highlighted the need to look beyond performance metrics to social media metrics as a measure of the social and community impact of a repository. Whilst the article is written from one Australian university’s perspective, the drivers and challenges behind researchers and universities translating their research into economic, social, environmental and cultural impacts are national and international. The primary takeaway message is for libraries to take more of a proactive stance and to kick-start conversations within their institutions and with their clients to actively partner in creating opportunities to share research.
本文探讨了机构知识库的社区覆盖范围和社会影响，特别是格里菲斯大学的机构知识库Griffith Research Online（GRO）。为了促进对GRO的研究，并鼓励人们点击存储库内容，2018年开展了一项试点社交媒体活动和随后的一些小型社交媒体活动。在简要介绍了这些活动之后，本文对这些活动进行了一些反思，并提出了未来社会参与方向的选择，特别是GRO，以及一般的机构知识库。这项工作需要将重点从知识库作为学术界的资源转移到整个社区的资源。该活动还强调，需要超越绩效指标，将社交媒体指标作为衡量存储库对社会和社区影响的指标。虽然这篇文章是从一所澳大利亚大学的角度撰写的，但研究人员和大学将其研究转化为经济、社会、环境和文化影响背后的驱动因素和挑战是国家和国际的。主要的收获是，图书馆要采取更积极主动的立场，在其机构内启动对话，并与客户积极合作，创造分享研究的机会。
{"title":"Social engagement and institutional repositories: a case study","authors":"S. Boulton","doi":"10.1629/uksg.504","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.504","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the community reach and societal impact of institutional repositories, in particular Griffith Research Online (GRO), Griffith University’s institutional repository. To promote research on GRO, and to encourage people to click through to the repository content, a pilot social media campaign and some subsequent smaller social media activities were undertaken in 2018. After briefly touching on these campaigns, this article provides some reflections from these activities and proposes options for the future direction of social engagement and GRO in particular, and for institutional repositories in general. This undertaking necessitates a shift in focus from repositories as a resource for the scholarly community to a resource for the community at large. The campaign also highlighted the need to look beyond performance metrics to social media metrics as a measure of the social and community impact of a repository. Whilst the article is written from one Australian university’s perspective, the drivers and challenges behind researchers and universities translating their research into economic, social, environmental and cultural impacts are national and international. The primary takeaway message is for libraries to take more of a proactive stance and to kick-start conversations within their institutions and with their clients to actively partner in creating opportunities to share research.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42044403","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}
Many academic scholars have encountered some variation of the phrase: ‘This manuscript could benefit from proofing by a native English speaker’. They may have received this feedback or given it. This article aims to use peer review as a prism through which to explore aspects of linguistic power and privilege. In unpacking some of the language of peer review we may question some assumptions we hold about ‘native’ English speakers. Although making reference to other written works, this commentary is foregrounded in personal testimony. It does this to contextualize the issues. It is written from the perspective of a storyteller. It draws upon the stories of languages and how we use them, of where they come from and where they are going. Running throughout is the idea and the very dark reality of colonization.
{"title":"‘Requires proofing by a native speaker’ – colonization and scholarship","authors":"E. Costello","doi":"10.1629/uksg.502","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.502","url":null,"abstract":"Many academic scholars have encountered some variation of the phrase: ‘This manuscript could benefit from proofing by a native English speaker’. They may have received this feedback or given it. This article aims to use peer review as a prism through which to explore aspects of linguistic power and privilege. In unpacking some of the language of peer review we may question some assumptions we hold about ‘native’ English speakers. Although making reference to other written works, this commentary is foregrounded in personal testimony. It does this to contextualize the issues. It is written from the perspective of a storyteller. It draws upon the stories of languages and how we use them, of where they come from and where they are going. Running throughout is the idea and the very dark reality of colonization.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48620431","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}
It is worth noting that all the material in this paper is adapted from, and appears in greater length in, the UKRR Final Report.1 This article summarizes the achievements of the United Kingdom Research Reserve (UKRR) project, which was established in 2007 to explore whether, through collaborative documentation, preservation and deduplication of low-use print journals, it would be possible to realize benefits through the generation of space savings across the UK’s Higher Education libraries. In total, the project received £11,581,672 in funding from HEFCE (now Research England). UKRR was managed by Imperial College London in partnership with the British Library (BL) and between 2007 and 2019, 35 further libraries participated in the project. UKRR ran in three phases and has now transitioned to a service delivered by the BL which is available to libraries across the UK. During all three phases of the project, UKRR supported the processing of nearly 130,000 metres of print journal materials and enabled the release of nearly 98,000 metres of shelf space across the 36 libraries. Print copies of scarce titles were preserved, nearly 10,000 individual journal issues from 8,000 journal titles helped fill gaps in the BL’s own collection and data for over 300,000 individual journal issues was enhanced in the BL’s catalogue. When calculating the capital and recurrent value of the space released amongst the participating libraries, it is estimated that the project delivered £4.04 in savings for every £1.00 of funding received.
{"title":"UKRR: a collaborative collection management success story","authors":"C. Banks, Theo Stubbs","doi":"10.1629/uksg.503","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.503","url":null,"abstract":"It is worth noting that all the material in this paper is adapted from, and appears in greater length in, the UKRR Final Report.1 This article summarizes the achievements of the United Kingdom Research Reserve (UKRR) project, which was established in 2007 to explore whether, through collaborative documentation, preservation and deduplication of low-use print journals, it would be possible to realize benefits through the generation of space savings across the UK’s Higher Education libraries. In total, the project received £11,581,672 in funding from HEFCE (now Research England). UKRR was managed by Imperial College London in partnership with the British Library (BL) and between 2007 and 2019, 35 further libraries participated in the project. UKRR ran in three phases and has now transitioned to a service delivered by the BL which is available to libraries across the UK. During all three phases of the project, UKRR supported the processing of nearly 130,000 metres of print journal materials and enabled the release of nearly 98,000 metres of shelf space across the 36 libraries. Print copies of scarce titles were preserved, nearly 10,000 individual journal issues from 8,000 journal titles helped fill gaps in the BL’s own collection and data for over 300,000 individual journal issues was enhanced in the BL’s catalogue. When calculating the capital and recurrent value of the space released amongst the participating libraries, it is estimated that the project delivered £4.04 in savings for every £1.00 of funding received.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43978773","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 purpose of this article is to examine the cultural change needed by universities, as identified by LERU in its report Open Science and its role in universities: a roadmap for cultural change.1 It begins by illustrating the nature of that cultural change. Linked to that transformation is a necessary management change to the way in which organizations perform research. Competition is not the only, or necessarily the best, way to conduct this transformation. Open science brings to the fore the values of collaboration and sharing. Building on a number of Focus on Open Science Workshops held over five years across Europe, the article identifies best practice in changing current research practices, which will then contribute to the culture change necessary to deliver open science. Four case studies, delivered at Focus on Open Science Workshops or other conferences in Europe, illustrate the advances that are being made: the findings of a Workshop on Collaboration and Competition at the OAI 11 meeting in Geneva in June 2019; alternative publishing platforms, exemplified by UCL Press; open data, FAIR data and reproducibility; and a Citizen Science Workshop held at the LIBER Conference in Dublin in June 2019.
{"title":"Built to last! Embedding open science principles and practice into European universities","authors":"Tiberius Ignat, P. Ayris","doi":"10.1629/uksg.501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.501","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article is to examine the cultural change needed by universities, as identified by LERU in its report Open Science and its role in universities: a roadmap for cultural change.1 It begins by illustrating the nature of that cultural change. Linked to that transformation is a necessary management change to the way in which organizations perform research. Competition is not the only, or necessarily the best, way to conduct this transformation. Open science brings to the fore the values of collaboration and sharing. Building on a number of Focus on Open Science Workshops held over five years across Europe, the article identifies best practice in changing current research practices, which will then contribute to the culture change necessary to deliver open science. Four case studies, delivered at Focus on Open Science Workshops or other conferences in Europe, illustrate the advances that are being made: the findings of a Workshop on Collaboration and Competition at the OAI 11 meeting in Geneva in June 2019; alternative publishing platforms, exemplified by UCL Press; open data, FAIR data and reproducibility; and a Citizen Science Workshop held at the LIBER Conference in Dublin in June 2019.","PeriodicalId":44531,"journal":{"name":"Insights-The UKSG Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47541206","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：