Vitek Tracz - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Vitek Tracz

Figure 7. The new F1000Workspace that provides a set of tools to enable researchers to collect re... more Figure 7. The new F1000Workspace that provides a set of tools to enable researchers to collect references, write research articles and grant applications, and collaborate with co-authors and colleagues.

Figure 6. The Open Peer Review box that appears on all F1000Research articles that provides a sum... more Figure 6. The Open Peer Review box that appears on all F1000Research articles that provides a summary of the peer review and version history of the article. It shows the different article versions, the names of the referees, the peer review statuses they have given the different article versions (green tick = Approved status; green question mark = Approved with Reservations status), and clickable links to the associated referee reports. Each article version is independently citable and includes details of the version number and referee status within the article title.

Figure 1. Cartoon of demonstrations that would seem appropriate outside journal offices.

Figure 4. An example of an F1000Prime recommendation showing the Faculty Members who made the art... more Figure 4. An example of an F1000Prime recommendation showing the Faculty Members who made the article recommendation, the rating they gave the article, and the associated comment as to why they felt that article was so interesting.

Figure 5. Summary of the F1000Research open science publishing process.

Figure 3. Faculty of 1000, which now comprises 3 core services: F1000Prime, F1000Workspace and F1... more Figure 3. Faculty of 1000, which now comprises 3 core services: F1000Prime, F1000Workspace and F1000Research, and is overseen by the F1000 Faculty comprising over 11,000 members.

Figure 1. Growth in manuscript submissions to the BioMed Central open access journals.

Information Services & Use, 2006

F1000Research, 2016

The way science and research is done is rapidly becoming more open and collaborative. The traditi... more The way science and research is done is rapidly becoming more open and collaborative. The traditional way of publishing new findings in journals is becoming increasingly outdated and no longer serves the needs of much of science. Whilst preprints can bring significant benefits of removing delay and selection, they do not go far enough if simply implemented alongside the existing journal system. We propose that we need a new approach, an Open Science Platform, that takes the benefits of preprints but adds formal, invited, and transparent post-publication peer review. This bypasses the problems of the current journal system and, in doing so, moves the evaluation of research and researchers away from the journal-based Impact Factor and towards a fairer system of article-based qualitative and quantitative indicators. In the long term, it should be irrelevant where a researcher publishes their findings. What is important is that research is shared and made available without delay within ...

Journal of Neuroscience, 2006

This is one of a series of commentaries on the future of scientific publishing.

BMJ, 1997

The very term “paper” is inescapably bound up with the printed word and has no real place in the ... more The very term “paper” is inescapably bound up with the printed word and has no real place in the context of “online.” It carries with it clear notions of space limits, formats, and information packaging that have become an integral part of the way science is currently communicated. Printed papers are the manifestation of the quantum theory of publishing. Scientists accumulate data, publish them, and repeat the process over and over again. The size of papers varies somewhat, with authors intent on increasing their publication list slicing their work much more thinly than …

Since the mission of NIH is to conduct and support medical research and to disseminate the result... more Since the mission of NIH is to conduct and support medical research and to disseminate the results of that research widely to the public and the scientific community, it will make use of electronic publishing technology to fulfill this role by establishing and maintaining PubMed Central. This new service is a Web-based repository, housed at the NCBI, that will archive, organize, and distribute peer-reviewed reports from journals in the life sciences, as well as reports that have been screened but not formally peer reviewed. The

Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have giv... more Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of science. This editorial describes the problems with the process of preparing and publishing research findings, and with judging their veracity and significance, and then explains how we at Faculty of 1000 are starting to tackle the ‘deadly sins’ of science publishing.

Figure 7. The new F1000Workspace that provides a set of tools to enable researchers to collect re... more Figure 7. The new F1000Workspace that provides a set of tools to enable researchers to collect references, write research articles and grant applications, and collaborate with co-authors and colleagues.

Figure 6. The Open Peer Review box that appears on all F1000Research articles that provides a sum... more Figure 6. The Open Peer Review box that appears on all F1000Research articles that provides a summary of the peer review and version history of the article. It shows the different article versions, the names of the referees, the peer review statuses they have given the different article versions (green tick = Approved status; green question mark = Approved with Reservations status), and clickable links to the associated referee reports. Each article version is independently citable and includes details of the version number and referee status within the article title.

Figure 1. Cartoon of demonstrations that would seem appropriate outside journal offices.

Figure 4. An example of an F1000Prime recommendation showing the Faculty Members who made the art... more Figure 4. An example of an F1000Prime recommendation showing the Faculty Members who made the article recommendation, the rating they gave the article, and the associated comment as to why they felt that article was so interesting.

Figure 5. Summary of the F1000Research open science publishing process.

Figure 3. Faculty of 1000, which now comprises 3 core services: F1000Prime, F1000Workspace and F1... more Figure 3. Faculty of 1000, which now comprises 3 core services: F1000Prime, F1000Workspace and F1000Research, and is overseen by the F1000 Faculty comprising over 11,000 members.

Figure 1. Growth in manuscript submissions to the BioMed Central open access journals.

Information Services & Use, 2006

F1000Research, 2016

The way science and research is done is rapidly becoming more open and collaborative. The traditi... more The way science and research is done is rapidly becoming more open and collaborative. The traditional way of publishing new findings in journals is becoming increasingly outdated and no longer serves the needs of much of science. Whilst preprints can bring significant benefits of removing delay and selection, they do not go far enough if simply implemented alongside the existing journal system. We propose that we need a new approach, an Open Science Platform, that takes the benefits of preprints but adds formal, invited, and transparent post-publication peer review. This bypasses the problems of the current journal system and, in doing so, moves the evaluation of research and researchers away from the journal-based Impact Factor and towards a fairer system of article-based qualitative and quantitative indicators. In the long term, it should be irrelevant where a researcher publishes their findings. What is important is that research is shared and made available without delay within ...

Journal of Neuroscience, 2006

This is one of a series of commentaries on the future of scientific publishing.

BMJ, 1997

The very term “paper” is inescapably bound up with the printed word and has no real place in the ... more The very term “paper” is inescapably bound up with the printed word and has no real place in the context of “online.” It carries with it clear notions of space limits, formats, and information packaging that have become an integral part of the way science is currently communicated. Printed papers are the manifestation of the quantum theory of publishing. Scientists accumulate data, publish them, and repeat the process over and over again. The size of papers varies somewhat, with authors intent on increasing their publication list slicing their work much more thinly than …

Since the mission of NIH is to conduct and support medical research and to disseminate the result... more Since the mission of NIH is to conduct and support medical research and to disseminate the results of that research widely to the public and the scientific community, it will make use of electronic publishing technology to fulfill this role by establishing and maintaining PubMed Central. This new service is a Web-based repository, housed at the NCBI, that will archive, organize, and distribute peer-reviewed reports from journals in the life sciences, as well as reports that have been screened but not formally peer reviewed. The

Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have giv... more Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of science. This editorial describes the problems with the process of preparing and publishing research findings, and with judging their veracity and significance, and then explains how we at Faculty of 1000 are starting to tackle the ‘deadly sins’ of science publishing.