1. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 (Ethical) framework for author-driven publishing Dr Michaela Torkar Editorial Director, F1000Research www.f1000research.com Michaela.torkar@f1000.com

2. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Open Science Publishing Unrestricted access to new findings More transparency increases research integrity Better reproducibility through data sharing Reduced waste/less publication bias

3. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Open Science Publishing Platform F1000Research: I.Overview of model II.Challenges

4. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 F1000Research - Basic Framework Author-driven process: no editors! All research (and debate) in the life sciences – no interest threshold; confirmatory and negative/null studies Who can publish? Author criteria. Publishing framework: scholarly publications; editorial policies (COPE) Post-publication peer review Open peer review Open data policy

5. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Post-Publication Peer Review Before publication: Basic in-house check, data deposition, copyediting and typesetting. After publication: Peer review, author responses and revisions are public Invited referees judge whether the work is scientifically sound Articles that ‘pass peer review’ are indexed in PubMed

6. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Pre-Publication Checks Authorship criteria Article types Language (and tone) Plagiarism Ethical issues (e.g. ethical approval, patient consent) Standards of reporting (e.g. CARE guidelines) Level of referencing Level of methodological details Provision of source data Inclusion of key sections (e.g. Competing Interests, Funding)

7. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Transparent Peer Review Referee reports and author comments are visible to anyone... Referees are named Referee reports are citable with a DOI View count shows how many people read the referee report

8. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Referee Scores Approved Approved with reservations Not approved Articles with sufficient positive evaluations are indexed in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase Articles that haven’t yet reached this threshold can be revised and re-reviewed (no time limit) or Minimal requirements for indexing

9. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Post-Publication Peer Review = Publishing in Versions F1000Research articles can always be updated, even after being indexed. Authors amended their article in response to referee or community feedback Authors updated the article following minor developments (e.g. software updates) Corrections are made through new versions! Each version is independently citable yet linked All versions indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, etc (if article passed review) ‘Track’ option

10. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Versions Different versions of the article are tracked Referees can update the approval status Unique DOI for each version

11. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Open Data policy Data sharing improves reproducibility: “[W]e evaluated the replication of data analyses in 18 articles on microarray-based gene expression profiling published in Nature Genetics in 2005–2006...We reproduced two analyses in principle and six partially or with some discrepancies; ten could not be reproduced. The main reason for failure to reproduce was data unavailability.” All research articles published by F1000Research are accompanied by the source data on which the reported results are based. Growing number of journals with open data policies: GigaScience, Scientific Data, PLOS journals, etc. Ioannidis, J. P. A. et al. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nature Genetics 41, 149–55 (2009)

12. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 All Source Data Included. Easy Access to Data. […]

13. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Author-driven publishing without editors: enables authors to share all their research (big and small, ‘positive’ and ‘negative’) without barriers. Helps address: -Unethical behaviour by editors and referees -Waste in research -Publication bias/underreporting of research Challenges/questions: -Who is ‘allowed’ to publish? -How do we define an ‘ethical’ publishing framework. What is ‘best practice’ and what is essential? What’s the publisher’s, author’s, institution’s responsibility? -How to define a scientific, scholarly paper? -What is pseudoscience as opposed to controversial science? -Incentives for authors to share ‘negative’ results? […] Publication ethics: Advantages and challenges of an Open Science model

14. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Open peer review: Helps address: -Unethical behaviour by referees -Credit for referees -Valuable debate during peer review is not ‘lost’ -‘Quality’ of peer review is visible to readers Challenges/questions: -Less critical peer review (?) -How do we judge the quality of peer review? Reviewer rating? […] Publication ethics: Advantages and challenges of an Open Science model

15. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Post-publication peer review/publishing in versions: Helps address: -Speed at which results can be shared -Transparency -Publication is not dependent on the judgement of 2-3 peer reviewers (but “approval” and indexing in bibliographic databases, such as PubMed, is) -Scientific record can be updated and corrected (versioning) Challenges/questions: -Evaluation of impact – better metrics -What does “published” mean (preprints, F1000Res articles “awaiting peer review”)? -What needs to be retracted? […] Publication ethics: Advantages and challenges of an Open Science model

16. Publication Ethics Webinar: Jan 2016 Availability of source data: Helps address: -Author misconduct -Reproducibility attempts Challenges/questions: -Incentives for data sharing -Peer review of data […] Publication ethics: Advantages and challenges of an Open Science model