Great point Hilda!
Even though the discussion is not a journal I find it more useful than
many journals as it spans the views intelligently and delivers very
valuable information
Amy
On 3/25/12 9:49 AM, "Bastian, Hilda (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Agree, Neil - and as well as the journals, research registries (like
>ClinicalTrials.gov), data repositories and so on will also be
>increasingly sitting alongside. I think it's important to remember that
>other forms of research publishing, indexing, archiving and dissemination
>are also thriving, and innovation in technology and
>publishing/dissemination/library models goes beyond journals and
>articles. The discussion we're having now is not a journal.
>
>Hilda
>________________________________________
>From: Neil Pakenham-Walsh, UK [[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 5:08 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Perils of open access
>
>Dear Suhail and all on Evidence-Based Health
>
>++I think we are all agreed in one way or another that OA is really
>reverse restricted access...++
>
>I disagree. I see Open Access as part of the solution to improving the
>availability and use of health information, and I see it becoming
>increasingly important over the coming years and decades. I also see
>initiatives to improve the availability of subscription-based journals as
>part of the solution, at least for the short and medium term. The
>best-known, but by no means the only such initiative, is WHO's HINARI
>Access to Research Programme, which provides free electronic access to
>thousands of journals to thousands of institutions in low-income
>countries; others such as INASP's PERii programme, African Journals
>OnLine and BioLine also offer support to journals based in low-income
>countries. Some journals based in LICs decide to go open-access, some
>stay as subscription-based. There are many excellent OA journals and many
>poor subscription-based journals.
>
>So, in my view, both OA and subscription-based journals will sit side by
>side for many years to come.
>
>Whatever your views on OA, if you are interested in the challenge of
>improving access to health information in low and middle income
>countries, please join us for the Webinar on this topic on 28th March at
>3pm UK time:
>http://www.hifa2015.org/hifa2015-webinars/
>
>If you would like to register (free), send details to
>[log in to unmask]
>
>Best wishes,
>Neil
>
>Dr Neil Pakenham-Walsh MB,BS, DCH, DRCOG
>Coordinator, HIFA2015 and CHILD2015
>Co-director, Global Healthcare Information Network
>Corner House (John Kibble Room)
>Charlbury, Oxfordshire OX7 3PN, UK
>Tel: +44 (0)1608 811899
>Email:
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>HIFA2015: http://www.hifa2015.org<http://www.hifa2015.org/>
>Skype: neilpw1
>Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/hifa2015
>
>Join HIFA2015, CHILD2015, HIFA-Portuguese, HIFA-EVIPNet-French,
>HIFA-Zambia: www.hifa2015.org
><http://www.hifa2015.org/>
>"Healthcare Information For All by 2015: By 2015, every person worldwide
>will have access to an informed healthcare provider"
>
>With thanks to our 2012 Financial Supporting Organisations: British
>Medical Association (main funder), Chartered Society of Physiotherapists,
>Commonwealth Nurses Federation, European Association of Senior Hospital
>Physicians (AEMH), European Federation of Salaried Doctors (FEMS), Global
>Health Media Project, Haiti Nursing Foundation, International Child
>Health Group (Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health),
>International Clinical Epidemiology Network, Joanna Briggs Institute,
>London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Network for Information
>and Digital Access, Partnerships in Health Information, Public Library of
>Science, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Nursing,
>UnitedHealth Chronic Disease Initiative.
>
>
>At 00:17 24/03/2012, you wrote:
>Thanks everyone - I think we are all agreed in one way or another that OA
>is really reverse restricted access and the question now is what should
>our responsibility to academic publishing be from here on as evidence
>based researchers and practitioners. I would propose we develop some
>evidence based guidelines to protect ourselves as evidence based authors
>and will start off by proposing the following:
>a) For authors with funds, use the pay per article facility for open
>access in conventional journals not "OA" journals as that would reinforce
>keeping submissions free for authors
>b) try to avoid submitting to "conventional" journals that impose hefty
>page charges or editorial fees and thus are restricting access both ways
>(eg Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism)
>c) Favor journals that have embargoed access for a fixed period eg 1 year
>over indefinitely restricted journals wherever possible
>
>Any thoughts or edits or additions?
>
>Suhail
>
>
>On 3/24/2012 3:24 AM, Jacob Puliyel wrote:
>Dear All
>This is another model that I think has potential to bring down costs to
>the minimum and yet be open access.
>
>But it is very new and yet to become popular with researchers.
>
|