Peer Review of Health Research Funding Proposals: A Systematic Map and Systematic Review of Innovations for Effectiveness and Efficiency
Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed.
We present an agent-based model of paper publication and consumption that allows to study the effect of two different evaluation mechanisms, peer review and reputation, on the quality of the manuscripts accessed by a scientific community.
In a slightly depressing new paper, researchers describe how they tried to get access to the data behind 111 of the most cited psychology and psychiatry papers published in the past decade. Only 14% of the datasets were made available with no restrictions on who could access them.
Citizen Science Can Make Systematic Reviews Faster and More Efficient
Citizen science: crowdsourcing for systematic reviews looks at how people can contribute their expertise to scientific studies using new online platforms - even if they don’t think of themselves as researchers or scientists.
High-Impact and Transformative Science Metrics: Definition, Exemplification, and Comparison
A novel set of text- and citation-based metrics that can be used to identify high-impact and transformative works. The 11 metrics can be grouped into seven types: Radical-Generative, Radical-Destructive, Risky, Multidisciplinary, Wide Impact, Growing Impact, and Impact (overall).
Who benefits from sharing data? The scientists of future do, as data sharing today enables new science tomorrow. Far from being mere rehashes of old datasets, evidence shows that studies based on analyses of previously published data can achieve just as much impact as original projects.
Illuminating Women's Hidden Contribution to the Foundation of Theoretical Population Genetics
A study documenting acknowledgment sections and identified "acknowledged programmers" in Theoretical Population Biology articles published between 1970 and 1990. While only 7% of authors were women, 43% of acknowledged programmers were women.
High Cost of Bias: Diminishing Marginal Returns on NIH Grant Funding to Institutions
A study suggesting that implicit biases and social prestige mechanisms (e.g., the Matthew effect) have a powerful impact on where NIH grant dollars go and the net return on taxpayers investments. They support evidence-based changes in funding policy geared towards a more equitable, more diverse and more productive distribution of federal support for scientific research.
Scientists on Twitter: Preaching to the Choir or Singing from the Rooftops?
Asking whether Twitter allows scientists to promote their findings primarily to other scientists ("inreach"), or whether it can help them reach broader, non-scientific audiences ("outreach"). Results should encourage scientists to invest in building a social media presence for scientific outreach.