Panorama atual dos repositórios institucionais das instituições de ensino superior no Brasil

O cenário atual de repositórios digitais mundialmente distribuídos estimula estudos diversificados com os quais esse trabalho visa contribuir, objetivando um levantamento dos repositórios de instituições de ensino superior no Brasil, verificando a eficácia de uma ferramenta experimental no tratamento e análise dos dados e usando como fontes os diretórios Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR), Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR), Diretório Luso-Brasileiro de Periódicos e Repositórios de Acesso Livre e a lista L_repositories. A ferramenta experimental Google Fusion Tables foi aplicada nos dados dos repositórios institucionais pesquisados, categorizando suas principais características: Instituição mantenedora, Natureza da instituição, Local, Região geográfica, Software adotado e sua versão, adoção do padrão Dublin Core e quantidade de trabalhos disponibilizados na data do estudo. Foram identificados 49 repositórios que em agosto de 2013 disponibilizavam 396.881 itens, sendo as instituições federais as com maior povoamento e o repositório LUME o primeiro em volume de itens; a região Sudeste com o maior número de repositórios e volume de itens disponibilizados; o DSpace o software predominante, com maior utilização da versão 1.6.2 e o padrão de metadados Dublin Core em todas as aplicações desse software. Este estudo comprovou a eficácia e utilidade do FusionTables, permitindo caracterizar o panorama atual de repositórios de instituições de ensino superior no Brasil. Os resultados foram disponibilizados em um Catálogo de Repositórios de Instituições de Ensino Superior no Brasil e um Mapa interativo dos Repositórios de Instituições de Ensino Superior no Brasil.

Gender, sex and sexuality in two open access communication journals published in Portugal: a critical overview of current discursive practices

The links between gender, sex and sexuality and their relevance are theoretically and politically problematic (Richardson, 2007). One of the difficulties in understanding their interconnections is that these terms are often used differently and ambiguously by different authors (and even by the same authors). This article reports the results of an analysis of the articles published in open access communication journals with known impact factor, edited in Portugal and published between 2005 and 2012. The diverse conceptualisations of those three basic concepts and of their (inter)relationships within communication research are identified. The complexity and the intricate (and often implicit) nature of both the meanings of these categories and their relationships underlie and justify our attention and further research. What the findings suggest about the current communication research into gender issues published in the two journals surveyed is that the ‘Gender differences discourse’ (Sunderland, 2004) is the most pervasive discourse (also) in academic practice. Additionally, they show that gender and sex are mainly taken for a fact, not a question that is worth being studied. The editors of these journals, as well as the scholars submitting manuscripts, need to be more aware of the traditional nature of the theoretical and methodological choices that they make regarding gender- and sex-related issues, as well as of the relative lack of attention to sexuality as a research subject.

Open Access in Times of Knowledge Unlatched : Cooperative Action for Books and Journals

Presentation at the seminar "Publishers and Funders for OA in Finland", Helsinki, May 24, 2016

Making it viable - enabling Open Access for Finnish scholarly journals

Poster at the CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI9), Geneva, June 17-19, 2015.

Bringing results to fruition through publication: An analysis of a peer-reviewed, open access and context-focused journal's editorial practice

When it comes to helping to shape sustainable development, research is most useful when it bridges the science–implementation/management gap and when it brings development specialists and researchers into a dialogue (Hurni et al. 2004); can a peer-reviewed journal contribute to this aim? In the classical system for validation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, journals focus on knowledge exchange within the academic community and do not specifically address a ‘life-world audience’. Within a North-South context, another knowledge divide is added: the peer review process excludes a large proportion of scientists from the South from participating in the production of scientific knowledge (Karlsson et al. 2007). Mountain Research and Development (MRD) is a journal whose mission is based on an editorial strategy to build the bridge between research and development and ensure that authors from the global South have access to knowledge production, ultimately with a view to supporting sustainable development in mountains. In doing so, MRD faces a number of challenges that we would like to discuss with the td-net community, after having presented our experience and strategy as editors of this journal. MRD was launched in 1981 by mountain researchers who wanted mountains to be included in the 1992 Rio process. In the late 1990s, MRD realized that the journal needed to go beyond addressing only the scientific community. It therefore launched a new section addressing a broader audience in 2000, with the aim of disseminating insights into, and recommendations for, the implementation of sustainable development in mountains. In 2006, we conducted a survey among MRD’s authors, reviewers, and readers (Wymann et al. 2007): respondents confirmed that MRD had succeeded in bridging the gap between research and development. But we realized that MRD could become an even more efficient tool for sustainability if development knowledge were validated: in 2009, we began submitting ‘development’ papers (‘transformation knowledge’) to external peer review of a kind different from the scientific-only peer review (for ‘systems knowledge’). At the same time, the journal became open access in order to increase the permeability between science and society, and ensure greater access for readers and authors in the South. We are currently rethinking our review process for development papers, with a view to creating more space for communication between science and society, and enhancing the co-production of knowledge (Roux 2008). Hopefully, these efforts will also contribute to the urgent debate on the ‘publication culture’ needed in transdisciplinary research (Kueffer et al. 2007).

Bibliotheca polytechnica. Directory of technical literature. A classified catalogue of all books, annuals and journals published in America, England, France and Germany including their relations to legislation, hygiene and daily life.

No more published.

Directory of prepayment medical care service plans [open to participation by organized labor groups]

"Issued under the auspices of the Cooperative Health Federation of America and the Committee for the Nation's Health."

Can open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals coexist?

It is often assumed that open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals are in competition with each other and therefore will in the long term be unable to coexist. This paper takes a critical look at that assumption. It draws on the available evidence of actual practice which indicates that coexistence is possible at least in the medium term. It discusses possible future models of publication and dissemination which include open access, repositories, peer review and journals. The paper suggests that repositories and journals may coexist in the long term but that both may have to undergo significant changes. Important areas where changes need to occur include: widespread deployment of repository infrastructure, development of version identification standards, development of value-added features, new business models, new approaches to quality control and adoption of digital preservation as a repository function.

Research Quality, Publications and Impact in Hydraulic Engineering into the 21st Century. Publish or Perish, Commercial versus Open Access, Internet versus Libraries

One of the main objectives of the first International Junior Researcher and Engineer Workshop on Hydraulic Structures is to provide an opportunity for young researchers and engineers to present their research. But a research project is only completed when it has been published and shared with the community. Referees and peer experts play an important role to control the research quality. While some new electronic tools provide further means to disseminate some research information, the quality and impact of the works remain linked with some thorough expert-review process and the publications in international scientific journals and books. Importantly unethical publishing standards are not acceptable and cheating is despicable.

Open minded and open access: introducing NeoBiota, a new peer-reviewed journal of biological invasions

The Editorial presents the focus, scope, policies, and the inaugural issue of NeoBiota, a new open access peer-reviewed journal of biological invasions. The new journal NeoBiota is a continuation of the former NEOBIOTA publication series. The journal will deal with all aspects of invasion biology and impose no restrictions on manuscript size neither on use of color. NeoBiota implies an XML-based editorial workflow and several cutting-edge innovations in publishing and dissemination, such as semantic markup of and enhancements to published texts, data publication, and extensive cross-linking within the journal and to external sources

Overuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a country with open-access endoscopy: a prospective study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: This prospective observational study was aimed at evaluating the appropriateness of use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) in primary care in a country with open access to and high availability of the procedure. METHODS: Outpatients were consecutively included in two clinical settings: Setting A (20 primary care physicians during 4 weeks) and B (university-based outpatient clinic during 3 weeks). In patients undergoing UGE, appropriateness of referral was judged by explicit Swiss criteria developed by the RAND/UCLA panel method. RESULTS: Patient visits (8135) were assessed. Six hundred eleven patients complained of upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Physicians decided to perform UGE in 63 of these patients. Twenty-five (40%) of the endoscopies were rated appropriate, 7 (11%) equivocal, and 31 (49%) inappropriate. Overuse of UGE occurred in 5.1% (setting A: 4.7%; setting B:6.5%; p = 0.39) of the patients who presented with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. The decision to perform UGE in previously untreated dyspeptic patients was the most common clinical situation resulting in overuse. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate use of UGE is high in Switzerland. However, to better reflect primary care decision making, overuse should be related not only to patients referred for a medical test, but also to the number of patients who complain of the symptoms that would be investigated by the procedure.

Aproximació al moviment "open access"

[eng] The article describes the background and current state of the open access (OA) movement. Its objectives --with roots in scientists' traditional desire to disseminate their works, in librarians' concerns about the serials crisis, and in technological advances-- were formally articulated in the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) declaration of 2002. This statement established two strategies for providing access to scientific information without any economic, technical, or legal obstacles: 1) publication of articles in OA journals or 2) deposit by authors of their works in stable institutional or subject-based repositories. The article suggests that this second "route" appears to offer greater possibilities of attaining open access in the short term. However, there still is a lot of work to be done in disseminating the concepts of OA and in training authors regarding procedures for depositing their works: in other words what is needed is a series of promotional activities for overcoming one of today's greatest challenges: author inertia.