The blockchain government

In 2008, a circulated white paper by a pseudonym Nakamoto discussed about blockchain, the alternative of processing electronic payments without financial institutions but to use peer-to-peer network distribution. Later on, it is apparent blockchain is not only applicable for payment transactions because smart contracts can contain any rules of agreement. Its peer-to-peer nature has been a disruptive technology allowing direct transactions between two parties, hence it can dismiss the intermediary role of trusted third party. A lot of these intermediary roles are provided by the government. As remarked by Charalabidis et al., governments put serious efforts to create automation and sophisticated digital services for citizens and businesses, but they keep facing major issues of providing open and trustworthy information, interoperability in systems and processes, and service quality and speed. This paper will discuss blockchain exploration by governments across the globe, whether it can answer the major issues of public services, then it will be concluded by the forecast analysis of blockchain government

Electronic Collection Management and Electronic Information Services

This post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of the article submitted to IUPUI Scholar Works as part of the OASIS Project. Article reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Permission granted through posted policies on copyright owner’s website or through direct contact with copyright owner.As the life cycle of information products has become increasingly digital from “cradle to grave”, the nature of electronic information management has dramatically changed. These changes have brought new strategies and methods as well as new issues and challenges. At the bottom line the services are increasingly delivered to a desktop from distributed publishers or information providers. Information organizations act either as primary information providers or as brokers between the user and the primary service provider. This paper covers developments in the factors and strategies affecting collection management and access. It discusses major trends in electronic user services including electronic information delivery, information discovery and electronic reference. Finally, it addresses the challenges in user and personnel education in response to this electronic environment and an increasingly information literate user population

The Academic Medical Library as Online Publisher

Objectives: To describe the use of an institutional repository system to facilitate the publishing activities of an academic medical library. Methods: The Library launched its institutional repository in 2006 and developed a mature collection of peer-reviewed articles, posters, and conference proceedings. Beginning in 2009, the Library sought to expand the use of the repository and partnered with two academic departments, Neurology and Psychiatry, to publish electronic journals. In spring 2011 the Library began to explore the idea of publishing its own peer-reviewed, open access electronic journal. Planning and implementation considerations included: choosing a unique and appropriate name; infrastructure and hosting options; organizational and governance structure; roles and responsibilities; journal structure and content; aims and scope; editorial, peer review and other policies and procedures; and dissemination. Simultaneously the Library undertook the publishing of its first electronic book, where issues of presentation, page turning, photo placement, and indexing became significant. Results: The inaugural issue of the Journal of eScience Librarianship was published on February 15, 2012 via the journal management platform of the Library’s institutional repository, eScholarship@UMMS. JESLIB has been assigned ISSN 2161-3974. The medical school joined CrossRef so that article metadata could be deposited into their system and each article assigned a DOI (Digital Object Identifier). Additional issues have been published, readership statistics and patterns are positive, and JESLIB is now indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals. In fall 2012, the Library published its first eBook, “A History of the University of Massachusetts Medical School, which was authored by the medical school’s head of the Office of Medical History and Archives. Conclusions: Academic medical libraries can successfully publish as well as host online journals and books. Utilizing the institutional repository for publishing purposes offers a number of advantages. The repository provides a tested infrastructure for ingesting and sharing of documents. The repository administrator possesses strong in-house expertise, experience with embargoes, metadata, preservation and dissemination, and most importantly, has built strong relationships and trust with faculty and researchers. The open access platform leads to wider dissemination and maximum impact, backed up by reliable usage statistics. Helpful planning guides and other resources are available to assist libraries and academic groups in publishing open access peer-reviewed materials. Lessons learned include: utilize professional copy editing services; locking papers for revisions speeds up workflows

Lessons Learned from Implementing Service-Oriented Clinical Decision Support at Four Sites: A Qualitative Study

Objective To identify challenges, lessons learned and best practices for service-oriented clinical decision support, based on the results of the Clinical Decision Support Consortium, a multi-site study which developed, implemented and evaluated clinical decision support services in a diverse range of electronic health records. Methods Ethnographic investigation using the rapid assessment process, a procedure for agile qualitative data collection and analysis, including clinical observation, system demonstrations and analysis and 91 interviews. Results We identified challenges and lessons learned in eight dimensions: (1) hardware and software computing infrastructure, (2) clinical content, (3) human-computer interface, (4) people, (5) workflow and communication, (6) internal organizational policies, procedures, environment and culture, (7) external rules, regulations, and pressures and (8) system measurement and monitoring. Key challenges included performance issues (particularly related to data retrieval), differences in terminologies used across sites, workflow variability and the need for a legal framework. Discussion Based on the challenges and lessons learned, we identified eight best practices for developers and implementers of service-oriented clinical decision support: (1) optimize performance, or make asynchronous calls, (2) be liberal in what you accept (particularly for terminology), (3) foster clinical transparency, (4) develop a legal framework, (5) support a flexible front-end, (6) dedicate human resources, (7) support peer-to-peer communication, (8) improve standards. Conclusion The Clinical Decision Support Consortium successfully developed a clinical decision support service and implemented it in four different electronic health records and four diverse clinical sites; however, the process was arduous. The lessons identified by the Consortium may be useful for other developers and implementers of clinical decision support services

Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives: costs estimates and sustainability issues

The RIOJA project (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja) investigated the feasibility of an overlay journal model in collaboration with the arXiv and in the scientific domain of astrophysics and cosmology. Scientists in this community are active users of e-prints repositories such as the arXiv. Furthermore, they have the support of Professional Associations and Learned Societies that have been pioneers in adapting to new publishing models and in particular electronic journals. Long term access to information as well as maintaining provision to sustainable systems/services is important to various parties in the scholarly communication system: the creators of information, developers and managers of services, libraries, publishers, funders and also users. Although scientific journals have been in existence since the 18th century (Lawal, 2001), factors such as increased journal subscription prices in the last decades and the emergence of new technologies have triggered discussions on the potential of new business models for publishing research. Furthermore, the advent of the open access movement also contributed to exploration of the issues around free access to information and provision of sustainable services. Exploring aspects of sustainability is something that should be seen over a period of time and whether launching, converting or simply maintaining a new or existing system/service the needs of the community it serves should be taken into account. Scientific journal publishing is a complex process. Besides disseminating scientific knowledge, registration of a claim for new discovery and a quality “stamp” it also facilitates social factors. Besides making research findings available and contributing to the advancement of knowledge, publishing is also a means for measuring quality of the work of scientists, allocating funding, and acknowledging contributions to knowledge. In this report, we will try to provide an overview of a new publishing model, that of the overlay journal. We will discuss the use of the arXiv by scientists in astrophysics and cosmology as well as the role of professional associations and learned societies in the publishing process for this community. We will briefly explain the methods employed to compile this report. We will also briefly present the RIOJA toolkit before we try and identify costs in the publishing process associated with the functions of registration, certification, and awareness and archiving. This report does not aim to provide a comprehensive report of actual journal publishing costings. Despite the fact that there are studies in existence that tried to document costs associated with journal publishing, the information presented there rarely corresponds to the actual costs of individual journal functions. In addition, the interviews with publishers and editors did not reveal any substantial information about costings that have not already been reported in the literature or are available on some publishers' websites. Where appropriate, this report aims to acknowledge studies conducted previously as pointers to further reading and, where applicable, to compare reported findings to observations made during the development and implementation of the RIOJA toolkit (described below). We will conclude this report with some of the issues reported in the literature around sustainability of services and some brief suggestions for further work

Publishing scientific research: is there ground for new ventures?

This paper highlights some of the issues that have been reported in surveys carried out by the RIOJA (Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives) project (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja). Six hundred and eighty three scientists (17% of 4012 contacted), and representatives from publishing houses and members of editorial boards from peer-reviewed journals in astrophysics and cosmology provided their views regarding the overlay journal model. In general the scientists were disposed favourably towards the overlay journal model. However, they raised several implementation issues that they would consider important, primarily relating to the quality of the editorial board and of the published papers, the speed and quality of the peer review process, and the long-term archiving of the accepted research material. The traditional copy-editing function remains important to researchers in these disciplines, as is the visibility of research in indexing services. The printed volume is of little interest

History and Role of the Journal Wetlands in Developing the Field of Wetland Science

Development of wetland science as a distinct field required consolidation of wetland-related publications in a recognized wetland journal. Growth of the Society of Wetland Scientists was thus tied to developing its own publication outlet. Wetlands debuted as the proceedings of the SWS meeting held in 1981, became a peer-reviewed proceedings in 1982, and was opened to outside submissions in 1983. Major changes in the journal through the years included gaining coverage in important abstracting services, switching to a larger page format, creating keyword and author indices, developing an electronic distribution option, converting to an online submission process, increasing exposure, and growing larger. Manuscript submissions increased, more papers were published, and more pages were produced. The journal moved to two issues in 1988, three issues in 1989, four issues in 1993, and six issues in 2010. Growth of the journal transformed it into the top journal in wetland science, with submissions coming from around the globe. The journal is multi-disciplinary in scope, exposing readers to a variety of ideas, methods, and applications. Consolidating efforts from many fields of expertise with a focus on wetlands helped to develop a broad, ecosystem-based science that is now globally recognized