Saturday, April 27, 2013
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Open access (OA) means different things to different people. To some, OA means immediate access to scientiﬁc content in its ﬁnal form on the publisher’s website when published. This is Gold OA, made possible when the author or the author’s institution pays the publisher an article processing charge (APC). A “lesser” version is Green OA, wherein no fee is paid and the posted work is either the peer-reviewed, accepted manuscript or the published article after an embargo period (typically 6 months or more). The term public access is used in the US for free access to publications, reports, and data of federal government–funded research. A recent ﬂurry of activity suggests that, at least in some countries and subject areas, OA is set to become a reality. In this short review, we outline the current state of OA and what it will mean for authors and for nonproﬁt/learned society publishers.
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Patrick O Brown, known as Pat, did his undergraduate and medical training at the University of Chicago, where he also studied under Nicholas Cozzarelli for his PhD. He was a paediatrics resident at Children’s Memorial Hospital, before taking a postdoctoral research position with Michael Bishop and Harold Varmus at the University of California at San Francisco. He subsequently moved to Stanford where he played an instrumental part in the development of microarray technology and its applications and where he is now a Professor of Biochemistry and Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. Pat has a long association with BioMed Central, dating from its origins at the beginning of the open access movement, and is on the Editorial Board of BMC Biology; so we asked him to give his own perspective on open access and how it began.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Michael Eisen doesn't hold back when invited to vent. “It's still ludicrous how much it costs to publish research — let alone what we pay,” he declares. The biggest travesty, he says, is that the scientific community carries out peer review — a major part of scholarly publishing — for free, yet subscription-journal publishers charge billions of dollars per year, all told, for scientists to read the final product. “It's a ridiculous transaction,” he says.