Paid Open Access by STM commercial publishers: a study

Interesting findings in this indian study:

• Open access is a BIG THING even for commercial science publishers

• Fees are often around 2,000 up to 3,000 $

 

DR. RUPAK CHAKRAVARTY &  DIMPLE SHARMA. Paid Open Access: A Comparative Study of Selected International Publishers. International Journal of Digital Library Services (IJODLS), Jan-March 2012, Volume-2, Issue-1, Available from: http://www.ijodls.in/uploads/3/6/0/3/3603729/rupak_96-134_.pdf [Accessed 22 June 2012]

PubMed: A few recent changes… (by Intellogist)

Joelle Mornini, from the great Intellogist webiste, has listed a few recent changes that happened in PubMed.

In a few words, nothing revolutionary… Her conclusion is:

“The filters sidebar replaces a cumbersome “limits” page that took a few extra clicks to access and apply to the search results.  Now, users can instantly refine their search directly from the results list.  The “sorted by computed author” search and the versioned citations both help users more quickly rank and identify the most relavent results or versions of a result.  The “Save items” portlet and “Citation manager” option allow the user to quickly compile and export the most relevant results into a concise list that can be manipulated through any type of citation manager software.  These subtle changes to the PubMed interface may not seem like enormous improvements, but they can save a prior art searcher time when every second counts“

See the full article at:

Mornini, Joelle. 5 recent changes to the PubMed interface, Intellogist, 19 June 2012. Available from: http://intellogist.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/5-recent-changes-to-the-pubmed-interface/ [Accessed 20 June 2012]

Personaly, I would rather say that switching to great alternatives such as GoPubMed, PubGet or Biblimed, instead of using this poor PubMed will save precious minutes!!! See my previous post…

 

The cost of Pharma R&D failure

Drug Failure Rates

• Estimated cost of bringing a drug to market: $1.2 billion
• Only one in 5,000 drug candidates that enter preclinical testing ever reaches the market
• For every five drugs that start clinical trials, only one succeeds
• Of the 4,300 companies engaged in drug innovation, only 6% (261) have registered a new drug since 1950.
• Worldwide, the pharmaceutical industry spends $50 Billion per year on R&D, but produces only 21 new drugs per year (2008)

Drug Side Effects Successfully Predicted By Computer Model. Medical News Today, 13 June 2012. Available from: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/246446.php

 

 

74% of Pharma companies have adopted Social Media…

.. but could do it better… According a study by Cognizant.

“For the pharmaceutical industry, social media can bridge the gap between companies and drug end users. As a direct consequence, approximately 74% of pharmaceutical companies have adopted social media platforms (… ). However, social media is only one key component in a communication strategy, and not a complete replacement. The level of adoption and maturity in implementation of social media is relatively low and inadequate in the pharmaceutical industry because of various factors. In particular, the regulatory environment in which the industry operates is a challenge. (…)

The article mentions different innovative ways to use this new channel.

• Boehringer Ingelheim: The company’s Twitter feed is filled with articles and retweets about more than just prescription drugs with some high profile celebrity tweeters, such as Lance Armstrong and Stephen Fry. The content ranges from studies, articles, blogs and video interviews on YouTube promoted in twitter
• Johnson and Johnson has created an active social presence that utilises a blog focused on stories of employees, wellness information, and corporate content. The blog contains robust content and is supplemented with YouTube and Facebook pages on corporate social responsibility initiatives and its involvement in social causes

Read the full story at:

Bhaskar Sambasivan. Is Pharma Getting the Best out of Social Media? Pharmaceutical technology Europe, 1 June 2012. Available from: http://www.pharmtech.com/pharmtech/IT/Is-Pharma-Getting-the-Best-out-of-Social-Media/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/775154 [Accessed 13 June 2012]

The complete study at:

http://www.cognizant.com/InsightsWhitepapers/Adaptive-Social-Media-in-Life-Sciences.pdf

Research Information (June/July 2012): again an amazing issue!

Patients as partners: Reports from the Health 2.0 workshop held recently in Lyon, France
http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=370

David Stuart. Web 2.0 in libraries should be more than social media.

Dave explains the differences between social media and Web 2.0 and gives some clues to other avenues that still need to be explored by the library and information professional.

http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=367

Michael Clarke. The need for semantics. Definition and role of semantics, and what is the future impact on journals publishing.
http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=371

 David Armstrong. Does ‘commercial’ have to be a dirty word?. David defends the superiority of the golden Open Access model

http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=369

Sian Harris. Opening up e-book access. Sian explains how the topic of Open Access e-book is emerging.

http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=368

“Do Not Track” Microsoft’s option directly attacks Web 2.0 business model and Google

Update 08/08/2012:

DO NOT TRACK in IE10 : the end of Web 2.0 business model ?

http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-sticks-to-default-do-not-track-settings-in-ie-10-7000002289/

 

When the Do Not Track feature of a browser is turned on, a user’s surfing habits and visits can’t be tracked across Web sites, making it more difficult for Web sites, advertisers, and marketers to create personal profiles of people and target advertising at them. Do Not Track is supported by privacy groups.

“Privacy advocates cheered when Microsoft announced that it will turn on the “Do Not Track” privacy setting in Internet Explorer 10 by default when it ships with Windows 8. It was clearly a strike for privacy” but also a direct assault on the “free” 2.0 business model, especially the Google one.

“The debate highlights the difficulty of disabling the online tracking powers much of the $30 billion online advertising industry. The idea of a “do not track” system was proposed in 2010 by the Federal Trade Commission in its report on online privacy.”

Don’t expect Microsoft’s decision to change things much for now, but in the long term, it could make a dramatic difference…  In the long run, though, it’s going to be hard for competing browsers not to turn on Do Not Track by default. People are increasingly concerned about privacy, and there will be tremendous pressure for browser makers to follow Microsoft’s lead. Whether part of Microsoft’s motivation was to harm Google is in a way beside the point. Microsoft did the right thing, and other browser makers should follow suit.

Sources:

Angwin, Julia. Microsoft’s “Do Not Track” Move Angers Advertising Industry. The Wall Street Journal, May 31, 2012. Available from: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/05/31/microsofts-do-not-track-move-angers-advertising-industry/ [Accessed 7th of June 2012]

Gralla, Preston. Do Not Track in Internet Explorer 10: A boon for privacy or a strike against Google?, Computer World, June 4, 2012. Available from: http://blogs.computerworld.com/20263/do_not_track_in_internet_explorer_10_a_boon_for_privacy_or_a_strike_against_google [Accessed 7th of June 2012]