I have great honor to inform you that Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is included in digital repository of Eprints.
What is Eprints?
I have great honor to inform you that Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is included in digital repository of Eprints.
What is Eprints?
18 June 2018 ¦ Geneva: The World Health Organization (WHO) is today releasing its new International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).
The ICD is the foundation for identifying health trends and statistics worldwide, and contains around 55 000 unique codes for injuries, diseases and causes of death. It provides a common language that allows health professionals to share health information across the globe.
“The ICD is a product that WHO is truly proud of,” says Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “It enables us to understand so much about what makes people get sick and die, and to take action to prevent suffering and save lives.”
ICD-11, which has been over a decade in the making, provides significant improvements on previous versions. For the first time, it is completely electronic and has a much more user-friendly format. And there has been unprecedented involvement of health care workers who have joined collaborative meetings and submitted proposals. The ICD team in WHO headquarters has received over 10 000 proposals for revisions.
ICD-11 will be presented at the World Health Assembly in May 2019 for adoption by Member States, and will come into effect on 1 January 2022. This release is an advance preview that will allow countries to plan how to use the new version, prepare translations, and train health professionals all over the country.
The ICD is also used by health insurers whose reimbursements depend on ICD coding; national health programme managers; data collection specialists; and others who track progress in global health and determine the allocation of health resources.
The new ICD-11 also reflects progress in medicine and advances in scientific understanding. For example, the codes relating to antimicrobial resistance are more closely in line with the Global
Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (GLASS). ICD-11 is also able to better capture data regarding safety in healthcare, which means that unnecessary events that may harm health – such as unsafe workflows in hospitals – can be identified and reduced.
The new ICD also includes new chapters, one on traditional medicine: although millions of people use traditional medicine worldwide, it has never been classified in this system. Another new chapter on sexual health brings together conditions that were previously categorized in other ways (e.g. gender incongruence was listed under mental health conditions) or described differently. Gaming disorder has been added to the section on addictive disorders.
“A key principle in this revision was to simplify the coding structure and electronic tooling – this will allow health care professionals to more easily and completely record conditions,” says Dr Robert Jakob, Team Leader, Classifications Terminologies and Standards, WHO.
Dr Lubna Alansari, WHO’s Assistant Director-General for Health Metrics and Measurement, says: “ICD is a cornerstone of health information and ICD-11 will deliver an up-to-date view of the patterns of disease.”
ICD-11 is linked to the WHO non-proprietary names of pharmaceutical products, and it can be used for cancer registration. ICD-11 has been designed to be used in multiple languages: a central translation platform ensures that its features and outputs are available in all translated languages. Transition tables from and to ICD-10 support migration to ICD-11. WHO will support countries as they move towards implementation of the new ICD-11.
By: Amy Rees, Customer Support Manager at Altmetric
What and why: does article performance data matter?
With an uptick in the number of journals being published, journals can now use article performance data to provide added value for researchers to encourage them to publish with their organisation and reward the choice to have so done. This additional value can manifest in different ways, both in raw numbers such as downloads, or more nuanced data such as discussions of an article in policy documents.
Collating different types of article performance data allows authors to see rich data associated with their publications. Authors can be rewarded for their community outreach and engagement, seeing payoff for the fruits of their labour.
The article performance data also provides a wider picture of how the research is being received and presented online. This allows authors to consider the questions: How are mainstream sources presenting their research? How are laypersons reacting to the research? How are governmental and non-governmental organisations using the research in the “real world”?
One facet of article performance data is the collection and presentation of altmetrics. Altmetrics, or alternative metrics, describe non-traditional attention to scholarly outputs. Altmetrics as an idea covers a wide range of types of attention: news stories, shares and mentions on social media, references from government policy documents or patents, and much more.
Designed to be complementary to traditional bibliometrics (citations between articles, for example), altmetrics can provide a much more immediate, richer picture of who is engaging with a piece of research, and how it was received.
Recognising author engagement efforts
Providing altmetrics to authors, an approach which has become increasingly commonplace amongst academic publishers, can help not only encourage them to disseminate the results from their research, but also to see the positive effects of doing so. Outreach and engagement by an author is a key factor in increasing the type of attention paid to a publication or the quantity of engagement. As authors take the time to blog, engage with readers on Twitter, do interviews with news programs, and address comments on public peer review forums, they are creating a conversation about their work that is not without considerable effort.
Beyond viewing the impact in the context of journal performance, this type of dissemination also allows for audiences outside of academia to develop their understanding of key issues that impact society. The effort authors put into making their research available and easy to understand is not without benefit to the academic community, whose funders often rely on public donations or whose institutions may seek to raise their profile in a specific field.
Undertaking this kind of broader engagement, and tracking its outcomes, is also increasingly used by individual researchers looking to demonstrate the influence of their work to potential funders, hiring committees, or as part of national research performance reviews.
Staying on top of the story
News coverage, now more than ever and whether true or false, dominates the public understanding of research. Popular science is discussed in major newspapers and dissected in opinion pieces. One journal article can be discussed in multiple news outlets within a short period of time, even with conflicting stories or perspectives. New research published in Science “The spread of true and false news online” indicates that false news stories are shared at a much higher rate than those based in truth. This means that “getting ahead of the story” is critical to authors and the communications teams that support them to ensure their research is being properly positioned.
If an author doesn’t have access to this news data they might not see a misinterpretation of their research and miss the opportunity to respond or clarify. Further, they might also miss the opportunity to engage with an interested community.
The aggregation of news stories, a type of altmetrics, lets the author keep track of how their research is being positioned and then they can work with the media/marketing team of a publisher to correct any issues or highlight particular feedback.
Likewise, public peer review such as Publons, the source used by Altmetric, allows researchers to see the peer reviews of their publication in an open format. This open data allows users to have a chance to respond to relevant criticism within their own field. Concerns about results, data collection, and other aspects of research can be addressed via public discussions. This encourages inter-group conversations about research and allows more direct feedback about the publication.
Expand data available to authors
Collating altmetrics data can be challenging and time consuming for authors. While a simple search online could highlight some of the news stories about a publication it masks the effort necessary to find a complete picture. Some stories may be available but, a user is constrained by the search engine they are using and what they consider “important results”.
Taking the time to truly understand the attention and engagement associated with a publication can lead authors to arduous searching of multiple platforms and sources. By providing altmetrics, journals are pulling together a snapshot of the online attention available and bringing it into a single place, saving authors time and hassle.
Altmetrics are also a great way to highlight sources that might not be available to authors otherwise. While some sources, such as Twitter and news, could be available to users, other sources are harder to find or simply unavailable to authors.
Finding mentions of a publication in policy documents is often a particular challenge for authors. Not all policy sources or organisations make their publications available in an easy to read format, such as PDF or via Word Document. They can be buried in website archives in older formats or simply hard to locate.
Further, there lies a practical issue with extracting policy references. Where does an author even start? Most governments publish thousands of different policy documents per year and it can hard to know even where to start.
As with policy documents, finding references to journal articles in syllabi is nearly impossible for an individual academic. While authors may be aware of where their articles are used in their own institution or maybe in part of their sector there are many other institutions that may be using their research for teaching. This data could be invisible to researchers who may not even realise the use and breadth of their research.
Highlight readership and academic engagement
While engagement with laypersons is a valuable understanding of dissemination, authors are likely interested in which other authors and academics are reading and considering their publications. Readership data, such as that provided by Mendeley, shows who has saved a paper in their academic library to read or use in a future publication. They also provide geographic as well as discipline data for the readers that have saved the paper. Authors can then see where researchers are saving their publications and which discipline. Additionally, Mendeley readership has been correlated, in some fields, to long-term citations.
Services such as F1000 – Faculty of 1000 – allow users to see which academics have recommended their paper. This data allows users to see that academics have not just saved the paper that they have read it and deemed it of value. Though saving a paper does denote at least interest and future engagement these types of recommendations show a direct engagement with the paper and a public endorsement of its content.
Article performance data should be viewed as interlocking and complementary data, with altmetrics working together with more traditional sources such as downloads, views, and citations. While traditional citations take longer to accrue they represent an important part of the story for understanding the performance of an article.
As with any other article performance data, a high volume of citations does not necessarily mean agreement or quality. For example, the now since retracted paper regarding Autism and MWWR written by Andrew Wakefield et al has more than a thousand citations.
Similarly, download counts and views provide another type of article performance data for authors to have a sense of the immediate response to the paper. While a high number of downloads and views don’t necessary denote agreement, it does display engagement and attention to the publication.
Providing altmetrics to authors is more than saying “You have X number of news stories and x number of Facebook posts”, though that can also be valuable attention itself. Altmetrics data allows journals to provide a more complete picture of the attention that has been paid to an author’s publication. From laypersons to science communicators to other academics and everyone in between, article performance data is a key source of valuable data for journals to provide to authors.
Article performance data is not only about addressing potential issues and positioning the research in the media, it is also about allowing authors to see the whole story. Providing a variety of different data allows authors to see areas, both disciplinary as well as geographic, that have shown interest in their publication and building connections to others who might be interested. In adding article performance data to the author package a journal is not only giving an author data, they are showing the value of a publication beyond its appearance in that journal.
The prevailing standard for defining authorship in scientific publishing comes from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These standards are broadly applicable in journals across disciplines and are a great place to start when creating or iterating on your authorship policy. According to the ICMJE, an author is someone who meets all the following criteria:
In short, each author should have made an important contribution that enabled the study to be completed, be aware of how the results were presented, and be willing to stand up for the final manuscript. Beyond your policy for inclusion, it is also best practice to indicate authorship practices that you consider unethical, such as
To guide the corresponding author to carefully consider whether someone qualifies for authorship, consider asking him or her to indicate the contributions that each author has made to the paper. The recently defined CRediT taxonomy has been used by several journals as a way to clearly demonstrate each author’s role on a given paper.
Presenting the CRediT taxonomy criteria (or a version of them that is appropriate for your journal) front and center keeps your authors on the same page as you. Authorship is incredibly important to career advancement for researchers, so it is important for journals to take it seriously and apply fair and consistent standards to all published works.
In a handful of fields, authors are listed alphabetically. (These are the easy ones!) However, in many others, the order in which authors are listed has implications for the authors. The first author is generally considered to be the primary contributor, and the last author may be seen as providing general oversight and direction (as the head of the lab, for example). Authors in the middle have contributed sufficiently to be listed on the paper, but perhaps in more limited ways than the primary authors.
To prevent what can be a long, protracted dispute later, it is best to ensure that author order is correct when you first receive a manuscript. The ICMJE recommends getting confirmation from every author listed on the paper that they contributed to the work and agree with the order in which they appear on the author list. Even if this is not possible or practical, be sure to require the corresponding author to confirm that they have verified the final author order with all other authors.
Researchers, or anyone else who has contributed to a paper in a meaningful way, who fall short of the requirements for authorship should still be recognized for their work if possible. Often this takes the form of an “Acknowledgments” section. Although contributorship does not have the career implications that authorship does, it is still a public recognition of work that contributors will appreciate and can benefit from.
Some examples of contributorship include the following:
Publishing your academic writing in a journal is crucial to advancing your career. Standards are high, and you usually only get one shot, so don’t waste it. Here’s how to make your paper the best it can be before submitting.
Just because a particular publication covers your field doesn’t necessarily mean that your article will be a good fit. Learn the aims of the particular publication, and then take it a step further by looking at the articles they choose to publish. If your article doesn’t seem like a good match, find a different publication to submit to or rewrite your article to make it more appropriate.
You’ll find that different publications have different requirements, and if you don’t follow them, you risk having your academic writing thrown out before it’s even considered. It would be a shame not to be published just because you exceeded their word limit or submitted your document as the wrong file type. (This service can help reduce the size of a paper that is too long.)
It’s not enough just to run spellcheck or read through your work once. Getting a set of professional eyes on your work is ideal, since they’ll catch mistakes that you may not realize you made. If you’re interested in working with a professional proofreader, check outproofreading options here.
When proofreading, it can be easy to overlook this part of your paper, but it’s important to make sure it’s free of errors. Also, you want to ensure that all sources you cite in the text are included in the bibliography, and vice versa.
Be sure to include a title, abstract, and keywords, and your paper should contain a clear statement of purpose in the introduction, lay out your hypotheses or the questions you are exploring, detail your methodology, provide a systematic analysis, and then discuss the results in the conclusion while acknowledging any limitations of the study.
It’s possible that the title you currently have is the best option, but more often than not, there’s a better one out there. You want the title to be accurate and descriptive. Look out for “filler” words and repetition. Take the time to brainstorm new ideas, and then get outside opinions to help you make a final selection.
The opinions of friends and family members are valuable, but this paper will be judged by someone who has in-depth knowledge of your area of study. Get an objective opinion before you submit your academic writing to a journal. Professors and other mentors are great resources for notes on how to improve your article. (Here is a list of consultants who can help as well.)
Are you using any copyrighted material? Any piece of content you took from an outside source should be cited, and you need to obtain permission before submitting to a journal. Printing something as though you own it can come back to haunt your academic career in a big way. A plagiarism check is always a good idea.
After spending all that time perfecting your academic writing, it can be tempting to throw together a cover letter quickly. This is a big mistake. You need this letter to be as compelling as possible because the editor may not get further than reading it. But that doesn’t mean it should be longwinded. Instead, keep it short and focused, just highlighting the key points. The goal is to entice them to read more. If you struggle writing cover letters,work with a consultant.
Can you add more value to your academic writing? Are there tables, graphics, or other visual representations of the data that can help support your arguments? Some journals even accept multimedia, such as video or audio files, which they may include on their websites. It’s always a good idea to get suggestions regarding artwork, tables, graphs, and other illustrations that could add value to your writing.
Even better than reading the journal to find out what they are looking for is having an actual conversation with the decision makers on the other end. Your enthusiasm and knowledge about the topic can help encourage the editor to take a look at a paper that he or she may otherwise not have considered. It’s also an opportunity to find more ways you can adjust your academic writing to be a better fit for the journal. If speaking with the editor isn’t a possibility, at least consider speaking with experts in your field before submitting.
If you’re not sure where to submit, this can be a great path to finding a publication interested in your work. Instead of you seeking them out, they may come to you. Journal editors often attend conferences with the intent to find papers to publish.
If you’ve followed these twelve steps, you’ve done your best to prepare your academic writing for publication. Be aware that it can often take three to four months to hear back from journals, so don’t be discouraged if you aren’t contacted right away.
EPrints has been leading innovation in the Open Access movement over the past 15 years. EPrints provides a set of mature ingest, preservation, dissemination and reporting services for your institution’s OA needs.
Created in 2000 as a direct outcome of the 1999 Santa Fe meeting that decided on the OAI-PMH protocol, EPrints software provides stable, pragmatic infrastructure on which institutions the world over have been utilising to enable their Open Access agendas.
As Open Source Software, EPrints’ greatest asset is the community of developers, librarians and users that feed into its progress and keep EPrints the innovative platform that we are so proud of.
What is Open Access?
Open Access is giving free, immediate, permanent online access to the full text of research articles for anyone, worldwide. Society as a whole can benefit from an expanded and accelerated research cycle in which research can advance more effectively because researchers have immediate access to all the findings they need.
Who benefits from Open Access?
The visibility, usage and impact of researchers’ own findings increases with open access, as does their power to find, access and use the findings of others. Universities co-benefit from their researchers’ increased impact, which also increases the return on the investment of the funders of the research, such as governments, charitable foundations, and the tax-paying public.
For teachers, Open Access means no restrictions on providing articles for teaching purposes. Only the URL need be provided; Open Access takes care of the rest. Publishers likewise also benefit from the wider dissemination, greater visibility and higher journal citation impact factor of their articles.>/p>
The two roads of Open Access
The two roads to Open Access should not be confused or conflated; they are complementary. (EPrints is focussed largely on the green road, because it is the fastest and surest way to reach immediate 100% OA; but the green road might eventually lead to gold too.) OA self-archiving is not self-publishing; nor is it about online publishing without quality control (peer review); nor is it intended for writings for which the author wishes to be paid, such as books or magazine/newspaper articles. OA self-archiving is for peer-reviewed research, written solely for research impact rather than royalty revenue.
How to provide Open Access
An Institutional Repository (IR) is the best way to provide open access to research output.
Software such as EPrints provides a web-based OAI- compliant IR for free.
This open source software can be downloaded for free at http://files.eprints.org
How can you implement Open Access?
Putting Open Access into Practice
Researchers, their institutions and their funders need to be informed of the benefits of providing Open Access and instructed on how quickly and simply it is done.
An Institutional Open Access Repository such as EPrints needs to be created (and registered in ROARMAP, so as to be seen and emulated by other institutions).
Seriously and carefully consider adopting and implementing an open access self-archiving mandate for systematically filling your repository with the target content (and registered, so as to be seen and emulated by other institutions).
Establish champions in your institution to advocate open access and become an active member of open access networks and communities to share and hear about good practices.
EPrints Software and Services
An Institutional Repository is the best way to provide open access to research output. Software such as EPrints provides a web-based OAI-compliant IR for free.
This open source software can be downloaded for free at http://files.eprints.org
If you would prefer us to take care of your repository, including building, customisations, hosting and support, contact EPrints Services to discuss your needs.
BASE is one of the world’s most voluminous search engines especially for academic web resources. BASE provides more than 100 million documents from more than 5,000 sources. You can access the full texts of about 60% of the indexed documents for free (Open Access). BASE is operated by Bielefeld University Library.
We are indexing the metadata of all kinds of academically relevant resources – journals, institutional repositories, digital collections etc. – which provide an OAI interface and use OAI-PMH for providing their contents (see our Golden Rules for Repository Managers and learn more about OAI at the Open Archives Initiative or Wikipedia).
The index is continuously enhanced by integrating further sources (you can suggest a source which is not indexed yet). We are working on several new features like a claiming service for authors within the ORCID DE project.
BASE is a registered OAI service provider. Database managers can integrate the BASE index into their local infrastructure (e.g. meta search engines, library catalogues). Further on there are several tools and services for users, database and repository managers.
In comparison to commercial search engines, BASE is charcterised by the following features:
Source: Bilefeld Academic Search Engine
all research outputs from across all fields of research are welcome! Zenodo accepts any file format as well as both positive and negative results. We choose to promote peer-reviewed openly accessible research, and we curate the uploads posted on the front-page.
Zenodo assigns all publicly available uploads a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to make the upload easily and uniquely citeable. Zenodo further supports harvesting of all content via the OAI-PMH protocol.
Zenodo allows you to create your own collection and accept or reject uploads submitted to it. Creating a space for your next workshop or project has never been easier. Plus, everything is citeable and discoverable!
Your research output is stored safely for the future in same cloud infrastructure as research data from CERN’sLarge Hadron Collider and using CERN’s battle-tested repository software Invenio, which is used by some of the world’s largest repositories such as INSPIRE HEP andCERN Document Server.
Zenodo is integrated into reporting lines for research funded by the European Commission via OpenAIRE. Just upload your research to Zenodo, and we will take care of the reporting for you. We plan to expand this feature with further funding agencies in the future, so stay tuned!
Zenodo encourages you to share your research as openly as possible to maximize use and re-use of your research results. However, we also acknowledge that one size does not fit all. Therefore, we allow for uploading under a variety of different licenses and access levels
The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) is a low-barrier mechanism for repository interoperability. Data Providers are repositories that expose structured metadata via OAI-PMH. Service Providers then make OAI-PMH service requests to harvest that metadata. OAI-PMH is a set of six verbs or services that are invoked within HTTP.
OAI-PMH Community Resources
Source: Open Archives Initiative