The UK open access (OA) policy landscape simultaneously preferences Gold publishing models (Finch Report, RCUK, COAF) and Green OA through repository usage (HEFCE), creating the possibility of confusion and duplication of effort for academics and support staff. Alongside these policy developments, there has been an increase in open science services that aim to provide global data on OA. These services often exist separately to locally managed institutional systems for recording OA engagement and policy compliance. The aim of this study is to enhance Brunel University London's local publication data using software which retrieves and processes information from the global open science services of Sherpa REF, CORE, and Unpaywall. The study draws on two classification schemes; a 'best location' hierarchy, which enables us to measure publishing trends and whether open access dissemination has taken place, and a relational 'all locations' dataset to examine whether individual publications appear across multiple OA dissemination models. Sherpa REF data is also used to indicate possible OA locations from serial policies. Our results find that there is an average of 4.767 permissible open access options available to the authors in our sample each time they publish and that Gold OA publications are replicated, on average, in 3 separate locations. A total of 40% of OA works in the sample are available in both Gold and Green locations. The study considers whether this tendency for duplication is a result of localised manual workflows which are necessarily focused on institutional compliance to meet the Research Excellence Framework 2021 requirements, and suggests that greater interoperability between OA systems and services would facilitate a more efficient transformation to open scholarship.

Purpose:To retrospectively review patient files in two teaching clinics in the United States and to assess the documented attempts to deliver health promotion messages when a chart indicated a need for health promotion or a red-flag condition that could be helped with positive behavioral changes. Methods: Approximately 100 patient files were randomly selected from each of two separate chiropractic teaching clinics, for patients seen after January 2007. Files were assessed for pertinent family history of diseases, personal medical history, and red-flag conditions of patients that would warrant intervention with health promotion. Results: Health promotion advice on at least one occasion was noted in 108 (53.7%) patient charts. Only 7 of 98 overweight or obese patients and none of those with family history of obesity were advised on weight management. Among 23 hypertensive patients, only 5 were advised and 17 of the 97 patients with risk of cardiovascular disease were advised. Conclusion: Chiropractic teaching clinics should assess what they are doing to help Americans reach their health goals. There is an opportunity to shape future practitioners so they include primary prevention as a part of what they do if the profession cares to move in that direction. Future research should look at mechanisms of delivery for health promotion, including better tracking of patients who need it and how staff doctors are trained to deliver oversight to interns in the area of primary prevention. (J Chiropr Educ 2010;24(2):159-164)

No abstract

While Open Access (OA) policies and funds have impacted the work of many librarians, there are many in the United States who have seen relatively little change in their jobs. In the United Kingdom, several major funders have implemented aggressive Open Access policies that favor Gold Open Access. As a result, many librarians find themselves managing Open Access publication funds or tracking compliance with a wide array of different policies. David Walters of Brunel University London gives some insight into how he's managed these new tasks, how it has changed perceptions of the library, and what may be in store for the future. How much of the research that goes on at Brunel University is subject to OA mandates? Systemic processes that help institutional services in identifying research subject to mandates are improving, but this continues to be a difficult question to answer. Mandates are challenging established structures of service

No abstract