National Library of Medicine: A New and Improved PubMed®

National Library of Medicine: A New and Improved PubMed® . “NLM’s PubMed has long been recognized as a critical resource for helping researchers, health care professionals, students, and the general public keep current with rapid advances in the life sciences. We are excited to introduce an updated version of PubMed that features an updated design and technology to improve the user experience.”

PLOS Blogs: PLOS Joins Other Publishers and Societies in Support of the Proposed White House Policy Regarding Federally Funded Research

PLOS Blogs: PLOS Joins Other Publishers and Societies in Support of the Proposed White House Policy Regarding Federally Funded Research. “A peer-reviewed article, whether published via an AAP signatory, or a signatory of this letter, is ultimately authored and peer-reviewed by the same research community. There is nothing, therefore, contained in your proposed policy that jeopardizes the quality and integrity of American research. This research will continue to be performed and peer-reviewed by the same people, to the same high standards as before — it will simply be disseminated for the benefit of the American people and the entire research community more cost-effectively, immediately, and openly.”

BBC: Social media data needed for ‘harm’ research, say doctors

BBC: Social media data needed for ‘harm’ research, say doctors. “Leading UK psychiatrists say they will never understand the risks and benefits of social media use on children’s mental health unless companies hand over their data to researchers. Tech companies must be made to share data and pay a tax to fund important research, they say in a report.”

EurekAlert: Vermont releases report by nation’s first state-led AI taskforce

EurekAlert: Vermont releases report by nation’s first state-led AI taskforce. “Vermont, the first state in the nation to form a taskforce examining the role of artificial intelligence (AI), has released its final report on the topic today. The 35-page report includes several recommendations, the foremost of which is the establishment of a permanent commission on AI to support its development and to propose policy initiatives to make that development responsible.”

Science: FDA and NIH let clinical trial sponsors keep results secret and break the law

Science: FDA and NIH let clinical trial sponsors keep results secret and break the law. “Science examined more than 4700 trials whose results should have been posted on the NIH website ClinicalTrials.gov under the 2017 rule. Reporting rates by most large pharmaceutical companies and some universities have improved sharply, but performance by many other trial sponsors—including, ironically, NIH itself—was lackluster. Those sponsors, typically either the institution conducting a trial or its funder, must deposit results and other data within 1 year of completing a trial. But of 184 sponsor organizations with at least five trials due as of 25 September 2019, 30 companies, universities, or medical centers never met a single deadline.”

Science Blog: Simplifying How Scientists Share Data

Science Blog: Simplifying How Scientists Share Data. “…often, sharing that data with other scientists – or with peer-reviewed journal editors, or funders – is difficult. The software might be proprietary, and prohibitively expensive to purchase. It might take years of training for a person to be able to manage and understand the software. Or the company that created the software might have gone out of business. A research team has developed an open-source data-management system that the scientists hope will solve all of those problems.”

University of California: UC Response to Publisher Letter Opposing Immediate Open Access to Federally Funded Research

University of California: UC Response to Publisher Letter Opposing Immediate Open Access to Federally Funded Research. “Ivy Anderson and Jeff MacKie-Mason, who co-chair the team overseeing UC’s publisher negotiations strategy, have provided the following response to a recent open letter in which a number of commercial and society journal publishers voiced their opposition to a policy, rumored to be under discussion by the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, that would require federally funded research be made freely available to the public immediately upon publication, rather than within 12 months as current policy stipulates.”