Explore the vast range of titles available.

Academic institutions are facing a crisis in scholarly publishing at multiple levels: presses are stressed as never before, library budgets are squeezed, faculty are having difficulty publishing their work, and promotion and tenure committees are facing a range of new ways of working without a clear sense of how to understand and evaluate them. Planned Obsolescence is both a provocation to think more broadly about the academy's future and an argument for reconceiving that future in more communally-oriented ways. Facing these issues head-on, Kathleen Fitzpatrick focuses on the technological changes - especially greater utilization of internet publication technologies, including digital archives, social networking tools, and multimedia - necessary to allow academic publishing to thrive into the future. But she goes further, insisting that the key issues that must be addressed are social and institutional in origin. Springing from original research as well as Fitzpatrick's own hands-on experiments in new modes of scholarly communication through MediaCommons, the digital scholarly network she co-founded, Planned Obsolescence explores these aspects of scholarly work, as well as issues surrounding the preservation of digital scholarship and the place of publishing within the structure of the contemporary university. Written in an approachable style designed to bring administrators and scholars into a conversation, Planned Obsolescence explores both symptom and cure to ensure that scholarly communication will remain relevant in the digital future.

Electronic publishing has been gaining ground in recent years and is now a recognized part of the digital world. In the most comprehensive assessment of electronic publishing to date, thirty-one scholars, librarians, and publishers focus specifically on scholarly publishing. They analyze a number of case studies and offer original insights on a range of topics, including the financial costs involved, market forces, appropriate technological standards, licensing issues, intellectual property, copyright and associated user rights, and the changing roles of researchers, publishers, and librarians. The editors begin with an overview of scholarly communication and develop a novel interpretation of the important role that technology now plays. Many of the following chapters are based on actual electronic publishing projects in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, so the evidence and data are drawn from real-life experiences. Of special value are the attempts to measure costs and patterns of usage of electronic publishing and digital libraries. Electronic publishing has moved well past the experimental stage, and with numerous projects under way this seems an appropriate time to assess its impact on the academic world, from teaching to research to administration.

Objective: PubMed’s provision of MEDLINE and other National Library of Medicine (NLM) resources has made it one of the most widely accessible biomedical resources globally. The growth of PubMed Central (PMC) and public access mandates have affected PubMed’s composition. The authors tested recent claims that content in PMC is of low quality and affects PubMed’s reliability, while exploring PubMed’s role in the current scholarly communications landscape.Methods: The percentage of MEDLINE-indexed records was assessed in PubMed and various subsets of records from PMC. Data were retrieved via the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) interface, and follow-up interviews with a PMC external reviewer and staff at NLM were conducted.Results: Almost all PubMed content (91%) is indexed in MEDLINE; however, since the launch of PMC, the percentage of PubMed records indexed in MEDLINE has slowly decreased. This trend is the result of an increase in PMC content from journals that are not indexed in MEDLINE and not a result of author manuscripts submitted to PMC in compliance with public access policies. Author manuscripts in PMC continue to be published in MEDLINE-indexed journals at a high rate (85%). The interviewees clarified the difference between the sources, with MEDLINE serving as a highly selective index of journals in biomedical literature and PMC serving as an open archive of quality biomedical and life sciences literature and a repository of funded research.Conclusion: The differing scopes of PMC and MEDLINE will likely continue to affect their overlap; however, quality control exists in the maintenance and facilitation of both resources, and funding from major grantors is a major component of quality assurance in PMC. This article has been approved for the Medical Library Association’s Independent Reading Program.

Predatory publishers solicit manuscripts through e-mail invitations to potential authors, with the goal of enticing authors to submit a manuscript to the journal. This descriptive study examined the characteristics of 206 e-mail invitations from predatory journals and publishers sent to faculty and students in a school of nursing over a 10-week period. Characteristics of these e-mails included use of flattering language, due dates for submissions close to the date of the e-mail sent, requests for general topics, and awkward phrases. However, many e-mails did not have characteristics that clearly identified them as coming from a predatory journal or publisher. Education on predatory publishing is needed for all nurse authors, specifically how to identify and confirm whether a journal is predatory or legitimate. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2018;49(4):171–177.

Increasing attention is being paid to the operation of biomedical data repositories in light of efforts to improve how scientific data is handled and made available for the long term. Multiple groups have produced recommendations for functions that biomedical repositories should support, with many using requirements of the FAIR data principles as guidelines. However, FAIR is but one set of principles that has arisen out of the open science community. They are joined by principles governing open science, data citation and trustworthiness, all of which are important aspects for biomedical data repositories to support. Together, these define a framework for data repositories that we call OFCT: Open, FAIR, Citable and Trustworthy. Here we developed an instrument using the open source PolicyModels toolkit that attempts to operationalize key aspects of OFCT principles and piloted the instrument by evaluating eight biomedical community repositories listed by the NIDDK Information Network (dkNET.org). Repositories included both specialist repositories that focused on a particular data type or domain, in this case diabetes and metabolomics, and generalist repositories that accept all data types and domains. The goal of this work was both to obtain a sense of how much the design of current biomedical data repositories align with these principles and to augment the dkNET listing with additional information that may be important to investigators trying to choose a repository, e.g., does the repository fully support data citation? The evaluation was performed from March to November 2020 through inspection of documentation and interaction with the sites by the authors. Overall, although there was little explicit acknowledgement of any of the OFCT principles in our sample, the majority of repositories provided at least some support for their tenets.

Open data is a vital pillar of open science and a key enabler for reproducibility, data reuse, and novel discoveries. Enforcement of open-data policies, however, largely relies on manual efforts, which invariably lag behind the increasingly automated generation of biological data. To address this problem, we developed a general approach to automatically identify datasets overdue for public release by applying text mining to identify dataset references in published articles and parse query results from repositories to determine if the datasets remain private. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach on 2 popular National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) repositories: Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) and Sequence Read Archive (SRA). Our Wide-Open system identified a large number of overdue datasets, which spurred administrators to respond directly by releasing 400 datasets in one week.

Publishing tycoon Henry Luce famously championed many conservative causes, and his views as a capitalist and cold warrior were reflected in his glossy publications. Republican Luce aimed squarely for the Middle American masses, yet his magazines attracted intellectually and politically ambitious minds who were moved by the democratic aspirations of the New Deal and the left. Much of the best work of intellectuals such as James Agee, Archibald MacLeish, Daniel Bell, John Hersey, and Walker Evans owes a great debt to their experiences writing for Luce and his publications.Intellectuals Incorporatedtells the story of the serious writers and artists who worked for Henry Luce and his magazinesTime,Fortune, andLifebetween 1923 and 1960, the period when the relationship between intellectuals, the culture industry, and corporate capitalism assumed its modern form. Countering the notions that working for corporations means selling out and that the true life of the mind must be free from institutional ties, historian Robert Vanderlan explains how being embedded in the corporate culture industries was vital to the creative efforts of mid-century thinkers. Illuminating their struggles through careful research and biographical vignettes, Vanderlan shows how their contributions to literary journalism and the wider political culture would have been impossible outside Luce's media empire. By paying attention to how these writers and photographers balanced intellectual aspiration with journalistic perspiration,Intellectuals Incorporatedadvances the idea of the intellectual as a connected public figure who can engage and criticize organizations from within.

Academic E-Books: Publishers, Librarians, and Users provides readers with a view of the changing and emerging roles of electronic books in higher education. The three main sections contain contributions by experts in the publisher/vendor arena, as well as by librarians who report on both the challenges of offering and managing e-books and on the issues surrounding patron use of e-books. The case study section offers perspectives from seven different sizes and types of libraries whose librarians describe innovative and thought-provoking projects involving e-books.

This book probes the dynamics of academic research and scholarship evaluation. Readers will learn about scholarly metric evolution, impact factors, disruptive technologies, and a myriad of forces affecting policy development at institutions through an examination of widely-used measurements and growing concerns about their influence.

Common Ground at the Nexus of Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication presents concepts, experiments, collaborations, and strategies at the crossroads of the fields of scholarly communication and information literacy. The seventeen essays and interviews in this volume engage ideas and describe vital partnerships that enrich both information literacy and scholarly communication programs within institutions of higher education. Contributions address core scholarly communication topics such as open access, copyright, authors' rights, the social and economic factors of publishing, and scholarly publishing through the lens of information literacy. This volume is appropriate for all university and college libraries and for library and information school collections.