New indicators for open science - Possible ways of measuring the uptake and impact of open science

Lampert, Dietmar; Lindorfer, Martina; Prem, Erich; Irran, Jörg; Serrano, Sanz

doi:10.22163/fteval.2017.276

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This outcome can be explained by the appearance of the new indicators (Altmetrics) in the analysis of scientific activity through social media [83]. In the same line, Lampert et al [103] and Serrano et al PLOS ONE [104] note that Altmetrics have a potential impact on social engagement in access to scientific information of general interest. In addition, collaboration with citizens also stimulates Open Access, since to achieve greater engagement scientists must give access to the results of research projects to comply with the principles of fair data [105].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 98%

Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities have been pressured by governments to change their way of acting and to be more responsible with the requirements of social development to face the challenges of globalization. To this end, universities must use the principles of Open Science, to allow them to be more transparent regarding the dissemination of scientific results. The purpose of this paper is firstly, to determine the progress made in Open Access policies made by the best-ranked universities regarding ARWU. Secondly, to examine influencing factors that enhance the level of openness in researching, in particular, "transparency", "reputation", "participation", "funding", "foundation" and "size". The main results show that those private and older universities, best-ranked in terms of excellence researching and those that have been gradually adopting Open Government policies concerning the dissemination of information through institutional web pages and social participation, are the most interested with complying the recommendations established by the authorities of the Open Science projects.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 98%

Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, some initiatives present both quantitative and qualitative indicators to track openness and transparency in publication and data sharing ( Smith, 2017; Smith et al ., 2016) and stakeholder understanding and engagement with OS ( Ali-Khan et al ., 2017; Tuomi, 2016). Other studies developed indicators to investigate how organizations implement OS ( Lampert et al ., 2017; Nosek et al ., 2015; Smith, 2017; Smith et al ., 2016; Tuomi, 2016) and a few studies have evaluated the implementation or impact of specific OS policies or practices ( Hardwicke & Ioannidis, 2018; Kidwell et al ., 2016). Our project differs from the other studies by developing more comprehensive measures of both social and economic influence, research outcomes, diversity and inclusion, trust, and opportunities for youth and early career researchers.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

An open toolkit for tracking open science partnership implementation and impact

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serious concerns about the way research is organized collectively are increasingly being raised. They include the escalating costs of research and lower research productivity, low public trust in researchers to report the truth, lack of diversity, poor community engagement, ethical concerns over research practices, and irreproducibility. Open science (OS) collaborations comprise of a subset of open practices including open access publication, open data sharing and the absence of restrictive intellectual property rights with which institutions, firms, governments and communities are experimenting in order to overcome these concerns. We gathered two groups of international representatives from a large variety of stakeholders to construct a toolkit to guide and facilitate data collection about OS and non-OS collaborations. Ultimately, the toolkit will be used to assess and study the impact of OS collaborations on research and innovation. The toolkit contains the following four elements: 1) an annual report form of quantitative data to be completed by OS partnership administrators; 2) a series of semi-structured interview guides of stakeholders; 3) a survey form of participants in OS collaborations; and 4) a set of other quantitative measures best collected by other organizations, such as research foundations and governmental or intergovernmental agencies. We opened our toolkit to community comment and input. We present the resulting toolkit for use by government and philanthropic grantors, institutions, researchers and community organizations with the aim of measuring the implementation and impact of OS partnership across these organizations. We invite these and other stakeholders to not only measure, but to share the resulting data so that social scientists and policy makers can analyse the data across projects.

show abstract

“…There is significant confusion about the meaning, benefits, and costs of open science, giving rise to a need for education and training to support the participation of researchers across both the public and private sectors (Spithoven et al 2010;Tuomi 2016;Lampert et al 2017). Academic researchers are major agents of change in achieving the broad implementation of open science, being key decision-makers about what is shared, with whom, and when (Parthasarathy 2011).…”

Section: Education/trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open science precision medicine in Canada: Points to consider

Moreno

Ali‐Khan

Capps

et al. 2019

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open science can significantly influence the development and translational process of precision medicine in Canada. Precision medicine presents a unique opportunity to improve disease prevention and healthcare, as well as to reduce health-related expenditures. However, the development of precision medicine also brings about economic challenges, such as costly development, high failure rates, and reduced market size in comparison with the traditional blockbuster drug development model. Open science, characterized by principles of open data sharing, fast dissemination of knowledge, cumulative research, and cooperation, presents a unique opportunity to address these economic challenges while also promoting the public good. The Centre of Genomics and Policy at McGill University organized a stakeholders’ workshop in Montreal in March 2018. The workshop entitled “Could Open be the Yellow Brick Road to Precision Medicine?” provided a forum for stakeholders to share experiences and identify common objectives, challenges, and needs to be addressed to promote open science initiatives in precision medicine. The rich presentations and exchanges that took place during the meeting resulted in this consensus paper containing key considerations for open science precision medicine in Canada. Stakeholders would benefit from addressing these considerations as to promote a more coherent and dynamic open science ecosystem for precision medicine.

show abstract

New indicators for open science - Possible ways of measuring the uptake and impact of open science

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science

Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science

An open toolkit for tracking open science partnership implementation and impact

Open science precision medicine in Canada: Points to consider

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About