Jump to content

User:Larry.leung.f1000/draft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Services[edit]

F1000Research[edit]

F1000Research is an open access, open peer-review scientific publishing platform covering the life sciences. Articles are published first and peer reviewed after publication by invited referees. The peer reviewer's names and comments are visible on the site. As part of its open science model, the data behind each article are also published and are downloadable. F1000Research publishes multiple article types including traditional research articles, single findings, case reports, protocols, replications, and null or negative results.[1] All cited to F1000's own website. Suggest replacing this with the below summary of independent literature.

F1000 is an open research publisher for academic works.[2] Its model focuses on publishing findings quickly using a post-publication peer-review system.[3] Authors submit an article and all of its underlying data.[4] F1000 does a prepublication check and publishes the article, usually within a couple weeks.[2][5] After the article is published, an expert is assigned to conduct a peer-review of the work. The peer-review is done publicly, online, and on an ongoing basis.[2] The expert conducting the peer review discloses their name and any vested interests, abandoning the double-blind, anonymous peer-review system that is typical in academic publishing.[4][2] Additionally, other organizations like the European Commission contract out the development and support of their own open-access publishing systems to F1000.[6][7]

F1000Research also publishes posters and slide presentations in biology and medicine.[citation needed]Replaced with similar cited content It publishes articles, blog posts, and has a section called "collections" for things like posters and slide presentations, but is primarily focused on articles. Users can click "Indexed articles" to only see articles that have passed a peer review.[5]

The journal has been criticized for unclear peer-review standards in relation to its inclusion in PubMed, but has since clarified how articles are indexed in the PubMed and PubMed Central databases.[8][9] Appears to be an op-ed written by the CEO of a competitor, RedLink. According to the About Page: "The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog aimed to help fulfill this mission by bringing together differing opinions, commentary, and ideas, and presenting them openly...Opinions on the Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by the authors’ respective employers...Copyright of each post remains with that post’s author." I suggest replacing this with more neutral/balanced sources as per the draft above.

In October 2014, managing director Rebecca Lawrence took part in a Reddit Science AMA (Ask Me Anything) as part of Open Access Week, to answer questions about the F1000Research publication format and about open science in general.[10] Using Reddit as a source is WP:UNDUE. Being on an AMA is not an important part of F1000's history or profile.

Previous services[edit]

Faculty Opinions[edit]

Faculty Opinions (previously F1000Prime) publishes recommendations of articles in biology and medicine from a "faculty" of around 6,000 scientists and clinical researchers and 5,000 more junior "associate" faculty. The service covers 32 disciplines and around 3,700 journals.[11] It previously existed as two sister sites, F1000 Biology, launched in 2002, and F1000 Medicine, launched in 2006. In 2010, these services were combined as F1000.com. The service obtained its current name in 2012.[12] Maybe I am missing it, but I don't actually see any of this information in the cited sources.

When faculty members recommend an article, they rate it as "good". replaced with more accurate and detailed description below

F1000 used to operate Faculty Opinions, formerly known as F1000Prime, until F1000 was acquired by Taylor & Francis in 2020. The founder of F1000 remained the owner of Prime, which he subsequently sold to tech company H1 in February 2022.[13][14] Faculty Opinions draws attention to scientific works that are highly rated by F1000's experts and is an alternative to impact scores that measure the number of times a work is cited.[2] The experts nominate primary research papers they felt were important or interesting, write a description of the work's significance, then link to where the work was originally published.[2][11]

Subjects are divided into categories called Faculties and sub-categories called Sections. Each section had about 10-50 experts to nominate articles.[11] Some academic works are put into top ten lists.[11] The papers are categorized as either novel, a technical advance, controversial, a verification of a prior hypothesis, or an interesting hypothesis.[11] Papers are also rated as recommended, must read, or exceptional.[15] The individual scores are used to calculate a total score for each article, which is used to rank articles in each discipline. This score is an article-level metric, or altmetric,[16][15] and is a potential indicator of the scientific impact of individual papers.[17][18]

Sciwheel[edit]

Sciwheel, formerly F1000Workspace, is a suite of tools to help scientists with writing, collaborating, reference management and preparation for publishing scientific papers.[19] The service was launched in May 2015.[20] Cited to a primary source (F1000 itself) and a broken link I cannot find or verify. Suggest replacing with a summary of independent literature below.

Sciwheel, formerly F1000Workspace, was a suite of software tools to assist authors of academic works.[2] After the acquisition, it was owned by F1000 founder Vitek Tracz,[13] before being acquired by SAGE Publishing in 2022.[21] Sciwheel helped users find, organize, format, and attach referenced citations to their manuscript from a word processor application.[3] It can also get citation information or attach a PDF from a URL using browser plugins.[3] Sciwheel users can search for citations from the tools or get recommended citations from PubMed based on an analysis of the citations the author is already using.[3] The tools also identify duplicate citations or information missing from citations, and puts citations in the bibliographic format the user prescribes.[3] Citations can be organized and shared using folders, tags, and notes.[3] Sciwheel also offers forums and tools to help researchers find others working on similar projects.[2][3]

F1000 Specialists[edit]

F1000 Specialists is an affiliate program aimed at experienced users and advocates of F1000 services. F1000 Specialists receive in-kind rewards in exchange for being a local representative and contact for one or more F1000 services at their organization. No citations and WP:UNDUE

Open Research Central[edit]

Open Research Central is a "central portal for open research publishing" launched by F1000 in July 2017.[22][23] The model has been running on F1000Research since 2013 and current partners include the Wellcome Trust's "Wellcome Open Research",[24][citation needed] Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's "Gates Open Research",[25][citation needed] and University College London's "UCL Child Health Open Research".[26][citation needed]

  1. ^ "About". F1000Research. Retrieved 2014-02-28.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h Williams, Ann (2017). "F1000: an overview and evaluation". Information and Learning Science. 118 (7/8): 364–371.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g Brody, Erica R.; McGraw, Kathleen A.; Renner, Barbara Rochen (January 17, 2017). "F1000 Workspace". Journal of the Medical Library Association. 105 (1). University Library System, University of Pittsburgh. doi:10.5195/jmla.2017.9. ISSN 1558-9439.
  4. ^ a b Rabesandratana, T. (2013). "The Seer of Science Publishing". Science. 342 (6154): 66–7. Bibcode:2013Sci...342...66R. doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.66. PMID 24092726.
  5. ^ a b Woodsworth, Anne; Penniman, W. David (2015). Current issues in libraries, information science and related fields. Bingley. pp. 131–136. ISBN 978-1-78441-637-9. OCLC 911266266.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  6. ^ Kelly, Éanna (November 26, 2020). "New EU open peer review system stirs debate". Science Business. Retrieved July 24, 2022.
  7. ^ Butler, Declan (July 6, 2016). "Wellcome Trust launches open-access publishing venture". Nature. Retrieved July 27, 2022.
  8. ^ Anderson, Kent (2013-01-15). "PubMed and F1000 Research — Unclear Standards Applied Unevenly". Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved 2013-08-14.
  9. ^ Lawrence, Rebecca (2013-12-12). "F1000Research now visible on PubMed and PubMed Central". F1000Research blog. Retrieved 2014-04-14.
  10. ^ Lawrence, Rebecca (2014-10-21). "Science AMA Series: I'm Rebecca Lawrence, Managing Director of F1000Research, an Open Science publishing platform designed to turn traditional publishing models on their head. The journal is dead – discuss, and AMA". Reddit. Retrieved 2015-06-26.
  11. ^ a b c d e Wets K, Weedon D, Velterop J (2003-10-01). "Post-publication filtering and evaluation: Faculty of 1000". Learned Publishing. 16 (4). ALPSP: 249–258. doi:10.1087/095315103322421982.
  12. ^ "F1000Prime". The Charleston Advisor. The Charleston Company. 2014-01-01.
  13. ^ a b Price, Gary (2020-01-10). "Scholarly Publishing: Taylor & Francis Acquires F1000 Research". LJ infoDOCKET. Retrieved 2020-06-25.
  14. ^ Landi, Heather (February 16, 2022). "H1 picks up Faculty Opinions to add top scientific researchers to growing healthcare network". Fierce Healthcare. Retrieved June 13, 2022.
  15. ^ a b Eyre-Walker A, Stoletzki N (8 October 2013). "The Assessment of Science: The Relative Merits of Post-Publication Review, the Impact Factor, and the Number of Citations". PLOS Biology. 11 (10): e1001675. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001675. PMC 3792863. PMID 24115908.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  16. ^ "Users, narcissism and control – tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century". SURF foundation. 2012. Retrieved 2015-06-26.
  17. ^ "F1000 evaluations are an indicator of future citation impact". Medical Research Council. Archived from the original on 2014-03-04. Retrieved 2014-03-03.
  18. ^ Waltman, Ludo (15 March 2013). "F1000 recommendations as a new data source for research evaluation: A comparison with citations". arXiv:1303.3875 [cs.DL].
  19. ^ "Work smart with Workspace, our new platform for writing papers". 2015-05-06. Retrieved 26 June 2015.
  20. ^ "Faculty of 1000 Workspace". Claude Moore Health Sciences Library, University of Virginia. Retrieved 2015-06-26.
  21. ^ "Technology from SAGE acquires Sciwheel". STM Publishing News. July 13, 2022. Retrieved August 19, 2022.
  22. ^ "Open Research Central". openresearchcentral.org. Retrieved 2017-07-14.
  23. ^ "ORC – Open Research Central: 'repulsive and malevolent' or 'lover of rebellion and freedom' | F1000 Blogs". blog.f1000.com. 12 July 2017. Retrieved 2017-07-14.
  24. ^ "Wellcome Open Research". wellcomeopenresearch.org. Retrieved 2017-11-07.
  25. ^ "Gates Open Research provides all Gates researchers with a place to rapidly publish any results they think are worth sharing". gatesopenresearch.org. Retrieved 2017-11-07.
  26. ^ "UCL Child Health Open Research". childhealthopenresearch.org.uk. Retrieved 2017-11-07.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Larry.leung.f1000/draft&oldid=1115243384"