Science Intelligence and InfoPros

Little things about Scientitic Watch and Information Professionnals

Archive for October 2012

To read: Open Innovation, Social network and advances in Drug discovery

leave a comment »

Extract of a recent good review:

Social networking is beginning to make an impact on the drug discovery process. A convergence of different commercial and publicly accessible chemical informatics, databases and social networking tools is positioned to change the way that scientific and medical collaborations are initiated, maintained and expanded, particularly in the realm of complex, rare and orphan diseases . A community-based platform that combines traditional drug discovery informatics with Web 2.0 platforms and strong privacy is believed to be the key to facilitate richer and instantaneous collaborations involving health care professionals with the same interests.  This way data from differential diagnosis, experiments and new drugs being tested are archived, mined and then selectively shared between colleagues in the Internet with standardized formats.

New drugs are subject to exhaustive crucial scrutiny, yet there has never been a corresponding effort to collect reports of drugs delivering unexpected benefits. If open innovation can lead to the creation of the world’s most complete encyclopedia such as Wikipedia, that same approach could be used to capture the exceptional untapped value associated with existing drugs, and to power the discovery of important new medicines. In the Facebook and Google era, there might be a better, more efficient and systematic way of harnessing this communal wisdom for drug discovery.  (…)

In light of these initiatives, large pharmaceutical organizations are in the process of transitioning from a fully integrated pharmaceutical company to fully integrated pharmaceutical networks with a social networking component connecting members with similar interests as well as project tracking and planning.

Academic and private sectors need user-friendly and efficient tools for information exchange and to share data points from patients. Pharmaceutical companies have interdepartmental databases of patients and samples for research, clinical trials and for patient follow-up, but there is no communication between these databases, even within databases housed in the same company [Social Media in Science and Medicine: http://www.laboratory-journal.com/science/information-technology-it/social-media-science-and-medicine%5D. To date, there are no social networks in the market that offers useful solutions for science and medicine in the clinical genetics field [Social Media in Science and Medicine: http://www.laboratory-journal.com/science/information-technology-it/social-media-science-and-medicine%5D. It is paramount for physicians to have reliable tools that will facilitate diagnosis and identify better treatments for diseases. (…)

As in the medical field, there is an increasing need for solutions in the scientific field for networking and communication between professionals with common interests. ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Mendeley are already providing some tools to achieve this goal but more specialized open-source media tools are needed in science and medicine. Despite existing competition in science, the best way for science to have a major impact in society and change the way we approach diseases is through collaboration and networking. In the end, the outcome will be the development of better drugs and faster translation of basic science to the patient’s bedside”.

Fabricio F. Costa. Social networks, web-based tools and diseases: implications for biomedical research. Drug Discovery Today, Available online 23 October 2012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2012.10.006

Written by hbasset

October 31, 2012 at 8:34 pm

Young scientists: social media to boots your career

leave a comment »

New channels for your science communication :

These nice advises are especially addressed to young scientists
Social media for your career: http://www.biggerbrains.com/dissemination

Personal branding: your own website http://www.biggerbrains.com/creating-a-simple-and-effective-academic-personal-website

Blogs and Twitter: http://www.biggerbrains.com/the-value-and-how-tos-of-blogging-and-microblogging-for-disseminating-your-research

How to “google” your article? http://www.biggerbrains.com/optimize-your-article-for-SEO

Written by hbasset

October 31, 2012 at 4:34 pm

Posted in Science 2.0

Tagged with , , , ,

Open Access: latest figures

leave a comment »

According a white paper published by Springer (the owner of BioMedCentral):

  • Only 12% of OA articles are paid directly by Authors
  • In 2010, 1.4 millions scholarly journals were published under OA
  • In July 2012, DOAJ has reached 8,000 titles
  • The BASE source indexes 36 million open access documents

 

Open access – broad readership, high impact. White paper, Springer, 2012. 6 p. Available online from: http://springer.r.delivery.net/r/r?2.1.Ee.2Tp.1jgMgt.C4E8ug..N.Y18y.3yN4.bW89MQ%5f%5fDCXcFQL0

Written by hbasset

October 30, 2012 at 8:54 pm

Posted in Journals

Tagged with , ,

Google Scholar: not reliable for citations counting

leave a comment »

According this study related to Social Sciences publications,  Google Scholar provides “vastly larger citation counts than either Scopus or Web of Science when all results are taken into account, but only slightly larger counts when only scholarly journals are considered“….

The study also deals with citation counting issue, saying  that “ it is relatively easy to falsify citing references to research and create “search engine spam” which artificially inflates citation countswithin Google Scholar. While it is unclear as to whether this is occurring deliberately and if so, towhat extent, it remains an issue which should engender cautious use of search engine citation data“.

As a conclusion the study says that ” Google Scholar may not be as reliable as either Scopus or Web of Science as a stand-alone source for citation data

Elaine M. Lasda Bergman. Finding Citations to Social Work Literature: The Relative Benefits of Using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Available online 23 October 2012

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.002

 

Written by hbasset

October 29, 2012 at 8:56 pm

Posted in Tools

Tagged with , ,

Social Media : first, find out where the fish are

leave a comment »

How to choose
There are a few factors to consider, but one of the most important is the localisation of your audience. Social media segmentation is a very significant variable, for example a recent study has identified that, among those who engage with social channels, 28.1% of those under the age of 24 use Twitter, but just 10.4% of them are on LinkedIn. The bottom line is, before deciding where to go fishing, find out where the fish are.

Raimo, Francesco. How to chose your social media platform. PMLive, 23th of October 2012. Available from : http://www.pmlive.com/pharma_news/how_to_choose_your_social_media_platform_442301

Written by hbasset

October 24, 2012 at 4:49 pm

Posted in Pharmaceutical Industry

Tagged with

1 of 3 papers will be published in open access by 2020

with one comment

Announcing a future European PubMed Central, the European Science Foundation calls sicentific organisation to work together to support the development of Open Access in Europe

http://www.infotoday.eu/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=85698&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InfotodayEU-AllArticles+%28Infotoday.eu+RSS+Feeds+%3A+All+Articles%29

Written by hbasset

October 24, 2012 at 4:44 pm

Posted in Journals

Tagged with ,

ClinicalTrials.gov: new site navigation features, new appearance, and new content

leave a comment »

Written by hbasset

October 10, 2012 at 4:59 pm

Posted in Tools

Tagged with