Check your name in Scopus, learn more about Plan S and the outcome of the FTC complaint against the OMICS Group.
Check your Name Profile in Scopus
Do you have published research? Chances are your author profile is already in Scopus, a large research abstract and citation database. Check your name in Scopus using the Author Search tool to confirm that your author profile is correct, your publications are attributed to you, and to find out who is citing your work.
What is Plan S?
Plan S is an initiative for Open Access publishing that was launched in September 2018. The plan is supported by cOAlition S, an international consortium of research funders, with the support of the European Commission and the European Research Council (ERC). The “S” stands for “shock.” Plan S requires that, from 2020, scientific publications that result from research funded by public grants must be published in compliant Open Access journals or platforms.
- Mann, DL. What Are the Off-Target Effects of Plan “S” For Translational Investigators? JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2019 Feb 25;4(1):132-133. doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2019.01.005.
- Wellcome and Gates join bold European open-access plan. Nature News. November 5, 2018.
The OMICS Group and FTC Complaint Update
Remember the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) complaint against the OMICS Group in 2016? The FTC has charged the publisher of hundreds of purported online academic journals with deceiving academics and researchers about the nature of its publications and hiding publication fees ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars. As of early April 2019, a federal judge has ordered the OMICS Group to pay more than $50.1 million to resolve Federal Trade Commission charges that they made deceptive claims to academics and researchers about the nature of their conferences and publications, and hid steep publication fees.
- S. judge rules deceptive publisher should pay $50 million in damages. Science. April 3, 2019.
- The Price for ‘Predatory’ Publishing? $50 Million. The New York Times. April 3, 2019.
- Court orders publisher OMICS to pay U.S. gov’t $50 million in suit alleging “unfair and deceptive practices”. Retraction Watch. April 2, 2019.
- FTC hits predatory scientific publisher with a $50 million fine. Ars Technica. April 2, 2019.
Digital Commons@Becker is a digital repository service hosted by Washington University in St. Louis Becker Medical Library. The service allows you to share published works with the world or restricted to a specific IP address range within the Washington University campus. The staff of the Becker Medical Library will handle all of the processing, indexing, and maintenance of any materials submitted to Digital Commons@Becker. All you have to do is give us your permission to create a collection and tell us the material you wish to include. Once posted, the link to the posted work can safely be shared on other websites. Want to know more or get your works published on Digital Commons@Becker? Contact us as email@example.com.
Fanaroff AC, Califf RM, Windecker S, Smith SC Jr, Lopes RD. Levels of Evidence Supporting American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology Guidelines, 2008-2018. JAMA. 2019;321(11):1069-1080. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.1122.
“Among recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.”
See related editorial: The Evidence Supporting Cardiovascular Guidelines Is There Evidence of Progress in the Last Decade? and reading in Futurity: 90% of Heart Guidelines Aren’t Based on Best Evidence.
Need help with your NIH Biosketch? See the post from the NIH offering advice on the biosketch and links for more information. Additional information is on the Becker Library guide on the NIH Biosketch.
Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. Scientists Rise Up Against Statistical Significance. Nature. 2019 Mar;567(7748):305-307. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-00857-9.