Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
Recently significant initiatives have been launched for the dissemination of Open Access as part of the Open Science movement. Nevertheless, two other major pillars of Open Science such as Open Research Data (ORD) and Open Peer Review (OPR) are still in an early stage of development among the communities of researchers and stakeholders. The present study sought to unveil the perceptions of a medical and health sciences community about these issues. Through the investigation of researchers‘ attitudes, valuable conclusions can be drawn, especially in the field of medicine and health sciences, where an explosive growth of scientific publishing exists. A quantitative survey was conducted based on a structured questionnaire, with 179 valid responses. The participants in the survey agreed with the Open Peer Review principles. However, they ignored basic terms like FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) and appeared incentivized to permit the exploitation of their data. Regarding Open Peer Review (OPR), participants expressed their agreement, implying their support for a trustworthy evaluation system. Conclusively, researchers need to receive proper training for both Open Research Data principles and Open Peer Review processes which combined with a reformed evaluation system will enable them to take full advantage of the opportunities that arise from the new scholarly publishing and communication landscape.
Highlights
For investigating the attitude of medical and health sciences community on issues about Open Research Data (ORD) and Open Peer Review (OPR), a quantitative survey was conducted based on a structured questionnaire, which is divided into three parts, namely FAIR principles awareness and Open Research Data-Open Peer Review related questions (See Appendix A)
It is noted that before completing the survey, participants were presented with the definitions of the key terms contained in the questions (e.g., OA, FAIR, OPR, ORD etc.) As it is depicted in the following table (Table 2), most of the population (78.2%) was unaware of FAIR principles, before the survey
As already stated in the results section, it becomes apparent that the participants of the medicine and health care community are positive towards Open Research Data initiatives regarding the beneficial contribution to the conduct of research and the advancement of science in general
Summary
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. It is an unquestionable fact that new knowledge is created through global interdisciplinary collaborations. The European Commission has made “Open Science” a high priority goal, along with “Open Innovation” and “Open to the World” initiatives, to keep European Union states competitive at the global level [1]. Open Science gives the opportunity through remarkable technological advantages to archive, curate and disseminate interdisciplinary research results across the globe in terms of greater efficiency, replicability, reproducibility and transparency. It has to be clarified that Open Science is not a dogma but a “movement which aims to make scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society” [2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
