Science Intelligence and InfoPros

Little things about Scientitic Watch and Information Professionnals

Posts Tagged ‘Congress

PharmaBioMed Seville 2010 in Research Information

leave a comment »

From librarian to info consultant.

Modern information professionnals are required to be information controllers, organisers, advisers and consultants…

Written by hbasset

February 1, 2011 at 8:08 pm

Posted in Science 2.0

Tagged with ,

Quote: Scientific congress on web 2.0?!

leave a comment »

“Certainly, peer-reviewed literature and scientific meetings in the
physical world will remain the main modes of distributing scientific
information and informal communication”

was in 2008. About the potential of moving scientific congress in virtual worlds. and they were right!

Stephen T Huang, Maged N Kamel Boulos & Robert P Dellavalle. Scientific discourse 2.0Will your next poster session be in Second Life ®? EMBO reports (2008) 9, 496 – 499. doi:10.1038/embor.2008.86

Written by hbasset

October 26, 2010 at 8:44 pm

Posted in Science 2.0

Tagged with ,

PharmaBiomed Congress: a brilliant programme

leave a comment »

PharmaBiomed will take place in Spain (Seville), from 8th to 10th of November.

The full programme was just released:

I will speak on “Real impact of Web 2.0 on Science business”

Registrations are still open.

Written by hbasset

September 28, 2010 at 5:03 pm

Posted in Science 2.0

Tagged with ,

Medical meetings indexing tool

with one comment

The Knowledge Discovery platform is one of the rare service to index medical meetings.

This unique platform brings medical meeting presentations and published journal abstracts together in one location“.

Mainly focused on clinical intelligence, it would help for the identification of experts, opinion leaders, competitors, business opportunities, etc.

Medical Intelligence Solutions provides this paid service:

Written by hbasset

April 20, 2010 at 5:31 pm

Posted in 01: Gathering, Tools

Tagged with , , ,

Science Citation Index under contestation

leave a comment »

An article in Scientometrics is contesting the leadership of the Science Citation Index:

Some of the conclusions and statements:

The number of serious scientific journals today most likely is about

The first question is whether the growth rate of scientific publication
is declining? The answer is that traditional scientific publishing, that is publication in peer-reviewed journals, is still increasing although there are big differences between fields. There are no indications that the growth rate has decreased in the last 50 years. At the same time, publication using new channels, for example conference proceedings, open archives and home pages, is growing fast

SCI is covering a decreasing part of the traditional scientific literature

conference proceedings are especially important in scientific fields
with high growth rates. However, the growth rates for conference proceedings generally are not higher than those found for Journal Articles. It is clear that the increasing importance of conference proceedings is only partially reflected in SCI

National Science Indicators is one of the products offered by Thomson
Reuters. Since this product is based solely on SCI/SCIE, SSCI and AHCI
the use of this product is problematic

Larsen, Peder Olesen & Ins, Markus von. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, Published online on 10th of March 2010:

Written by hbasset

March 30, 2010 at 7:13 pm

Communicating knowledge: how and why researchers publish and disseminate their findings

leave a comment »

An important study has been published by the RIN.

The report examines the motivations, incentives and constraints that lead UK researchers in different subjects and disciplines to publish and disseminate their work in different ways. It explores how and why they cite other researchers’ work, as well as how their decisions on publication and citation are influenced by past and anticipated research assessment.

Only 12 % of UK researchers consider as “very important” or “quite important” to communicate on Blog or web forums!

The survey shows that over 60% of researchers believe that open access repositories are either ‘not important’ or ‘not applicable’ to the dissemination of their research. This may reflect researchers’ concerns about the little influence of this new way to disseminate Science

Traditional channels (Peer reviewed journals and Conference communciations) are still the preferred choice (respectively 99.9% and 86 % “very important” or “quite important”).

Read more

Written by hbasset

October 1, 2009 at 4:38 pm