bioinformatician_next_door, to random
@bioinformatician_next_door@kafeneio.social avatar

Discover a world of learning with JSTOR!! 🌍📚

I would like to share a website I found the other day, a digital house of knowledge known as JSTOR!

Imagine having millions of academic articles, books, and crucial primary sources right at your fingertips. Whether you're diving deep into historical documents or exploring contemporary studies, JSTOR's extensive library is rich with opportunities for discovery and enlightenment.

bioinformatician_next_door,
@bioinformatician_next_door@kafeneio.social avatar

@Mehrad
Yes does it properly but still it costs ~1K.
That is why I believe to that scientists have to change the Infrastructure they use for research publishing/review and funding.
We need a scientific network that university/state lends the infrastructure to keep research progress on it, instead of using private journals archiving our articles and data. The Infra is here: we just need to transform it to a social scientific network, hopefully will be one way.

nuest, to random

Nice overview on #Reproducibility by #F1000Research

https://f1000.com/resources-for-researchers/open-research/reproducibility/#formstack

Hope it inspires many of their authors and reviewers!

Don't want to give T&F your email? Download the PDF from https://f1000.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/F1000-058-%E2%80%93-Reproducibility-Guide_v1.pdf

It is a bit short on the steps that publishers and journals could take though. If you are an editor with F1000, take a look at http://cdchck.science/

#ReproducibleResearch #OpenScience #CODECHECK

image/png
image/png

boud, to academicchatter
@boud@framapiaf.org avatar

@academicchatter

Any opinions on [0][1] for ? Columbia Uni Mailman SchPublicHealth [2] and NYT [3] seem to take it seriously. I'm rather annoyed at , which pressured me for a fast report on v2 of a paper but after 5 months and several reminders hasn't published my review of v2 [4].

Qeios sounds serious. Is it?

[0] https://www.qeios.com/publishing-policy

[1] https://www.qeios.com/recent-articles

[2] https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/news/new-journal-seeks-reduce-bias-scientific-publishing

[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/opinion/peer-review-research-studies.html

[4] https://f1000research.com/articles/11-344/v2

daniel_huppmann, to random German
@daniel_huppmann@mastodon.social avatar

How can , fast-preprint & open foster ? And what are key themes for the in the context of & ?
As advisory board of the Gateway, we formulate a research agenda!
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.124267.1

boud, to random
@boud@framapiaf.org avatar

@dasaptaerwin

#F1000Research is not going to get many reviewers for its #OpenPeerReview system if after two and a half months, a review of version 2 of a paper is still not published:

https://f1000research.com/articles/11-344/v2

Receipt of my second review was confirmed by email on 6 Feb 2023 ...

#F1000 had a nice idea, but currently it doesn't seem to be working.

#OpenScience

https://framapiaf.org/@boud/108669474100439567

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • khanakhh
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • everett
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • normalnudes
  • tacticalgear
  • cisconetworking
  • tester
  • Leos
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines