On the Winds of Change: Repositories, Researchers and Technologies: The 18th Health Sciences Lively Lunch Discussion

This year’s sponsored but no holds barred health sciences lively lunchtime gathering again was open to all. Moderator Jean Gudenas introduced this year’s three presentations: a report on a survey, a report on a research study, and a technology update. Ramune Kubilius provided a brief annual traditional update on developments in the health sciences publishing world. She then segued to highlighting some findings from a survey she and two co-authors conducted in December 2017-January 2018 of AAHSL (Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries) members on medical school institutional repositories (IRs). She focused on responses to questions about IR collections and management. Are early career researchers the harbingers of change? Anthony Watkinson shared some findings from a three year (2015-2018) worldwide CIBER longitudinal research study of early career researchers that was commissioned by the Publishing Research Consortium. He focused on highlighting what medical researchers in countries, including the U.S., where surveys were conducted, think about scholarly communications and scholarly publishing. Does the RA21 project hold promise for keeping access secure in the future? John Felts began with a background and a review of some current technologies. He then provided some insights as to what expectations we can have from initiatives such as RA21, with its mission: “to align and simplify pathways to subscribed content across participating scientific platforms…

Research to support the British Library's work on emerging formats

A report for the British Library examining the issues around the legal deposit and preservation of apps, interactive narratives and databases

Log Usage Analysis: What it Discloses about Use, Information Seeking and Trustworthiness

The Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition research project1) was a study which investigated the behaviours and attitudes of academic researchers as producers and consumers of scholarly information resources in respect to how they determine authority and trustworthiness. The research questions for the study arose out of CIBER’s studies of the virtual scholar. This paper focuses on elements of this study, mainly an analysis of a scholarly publisher’s usage logs, which was undertaken at the start of the project in order to build an evidence base, which would help calibrate the main methodological tools used by the project: interviews and questionnaire. The specific purpose of the log study was to identify and assess the digital usage behaviours that potentially raise trustworthiness and authority questions. Results from the self-report part of the study were additionally used to explain the logs. The main findings were that: 1) logs provide a good indicator of use and information seeking behaviour, albeit in respect to just a part of the information seeking journey; 2) the ‘lite’ form of information seeking behaviour observed in the logs is a sign of users trying to make their mind up in the face of a tsunami of information as to what is relevant and to be trusted; 3) Google and Google Scholar are the discovery platforms of choice for academic researchers, which partly points to the fact that they are influenced in what they use and read by ease of access; 4) usage is not a suitable proxy for quality. The paper also provides contextual data from CIBER’s previous studies

To Boldly Go Beyond Downloads: How are Journal Articles Shared and Used?

With more scholarly journals being distributed electronically rather than in print form, we know that researchers download many articles. What is less well known is how journal articles are used after they are initially downloaded. To what extent are they saved, uploaded, tweeted, or otherwise shared? How does this reuse increase their total use and value to research and how does it influence library usage figures? University of Tennessee Chancellor’s Professor Carol Tenopir, Professor Suzie Allard, and Adjunct Professor David Nicholas are leading a team of international researchers on a the project, “Beyond Downloads,” funded by a grant from Elsevier. The project will look at how and why scholarly electronic articles are downloaded, saved, and shared by researchers. Sharing in today’s digital environment may include links posted on social media, like Twitter, and in blogs or via e‐mail. Having a realistic estimate of this secondary use will help provide a more accurate picture of the total use of scholarly articles. The speakers will present the objectives of the study, share the approach and avenues of exploration, and report on some preliminary findings. Furthermore, the speakers will discuss how the potential learnings could yield benefits to the library community

The Secret Life of Articles: From Download Metrics to Downstream Impact

Traditional citation and download metrics have long been the standard by which we measure the use and value of scholarly articles. However, these methods neglect the usage and real‐world impact of newer technologies to access, store, and share downloaded scholarly articles. This session’s speakers will share the results of interviews, focus groups, and an international survey with 1,000 scholars to investigate the ways in which they now access, store, share, and use downloaded scholarly articles. By identifying and measuring what traditional metrics fail to examine, the Beyond Downloads project attempts to capture a more complete picture of the use and value of scholarly articles, which is critical for librarians, publishers, and vendors to understand in developing scholarly tools and services. Complete usage can no longer be measured by traditional means alone. The speakers will discuss the findings of their research and the implications for metrics that take into account scholars’ changing access, reading, and sharing behaviors

Early career researchers in the pandemic-fashioned ‘new scholarly normality’: a first look into the big changes and long-lasting impacts (international analysis)

After two-years of repeat interviewing around 170 early career science/social science researchers from China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Russia, Spain, UK and US about their work life and scholarly communications in pandemic-times, the Harbingers project is now in possession of a mountain of data on what constitutes a very important academic topic. The purpose of the paper is to share the early highlights of the data, with a focus on the main and lasting impacts of the pandemic. The data presented comes from the national interviewers, who had conducted 3 rounds of interviews with their 20 or so early career researchers (ECRs) over two years and, thus, knew them well. They were asked to provide an ‘aerial view’ by identifying the most important impacts they had detected while things were still fresh in their minds. The main findings are that: 1) ECRs, the research workhorses, have generally proved to be resilient and perseverant and some have prospered; 2) the pandemic has fast-tracked researchers to a virtual and remote scholarly world, with all the advantages and disadvantages that comes with it. The data, however, is nuanced, with significant differences occurring between countries, especially China and France. The paper also updates a literature review on the topic previously published in this journal

Risk of myocarditis following sequential doses of COVID-19 vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 infection by age and sex

Myocarditis is more common after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination, but the risks in younger people and after sequential vaccine doses are less certain. METHODS: A self-controlled case series study of people ages 13 years or older vaccinated for COVID-19 in England between December 1, 2020, and December 15, 2021, evaluated the association between vaccination and myocarditis, stratified by age and sex. The incidence rate ratio and excess number of hospital admissions or deaths from myocarditis per million people were estimated for the 1 to 28 days after sequential doses of adenovirus (ChAdOx1) or mRNA-based (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273) vaccines, or after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: In 42 842 345 people receiving at least 1 dose of vaccine, 21 242 629 received 3 doses, and 5 934 153 had SARS-CoV-2 infection before or after vaccination. Myocarditis occurred in 2861 (0.007%) people, with 617 events 1 to 28 days after vaccination. Risk of myocarditis was increased in the 1 to 28 days after a first dose of ChAdOx1 (incidence rate ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.09–1.62]) and a first, second, and booster dose of BNT162b2 (1.52 [95% CI, 1.24–1.85]; 1.57 [95% CI, 1.28–1.92], and 1.72 [95% CI, 1.33–2.22], respectively) but was lower than the risks after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test before or after vaccination (11.14 [95% CI, 8.64–14.36] and 5.97 [95% CI, 4.54–7.87], respectively). The risk of myocarditis was higher 1 to 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273 (11.76 [95% CI, 7.25–19.08]) and persisted after a booster dose (2.64 [95% CI, 1.25–5.58]). Associations were stronger in men younger than 40 years for all vaccines. In men younger than 40 years old, the number of excess myocarditis events per million people was higher after a second dose of mRNA-1273 than after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (97 [95% CI, 91–99] versus 16 [95% CI, 12–18]). In women younger than 40 years, the number of excess events per million was similar after a second dose of mRNA-1273 and a positive test (7 [95% CI, 1–9] versus 8 [95% CI, 6–8]). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the risk of myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination and remains modest after sequential doses including a booster dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. However, the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine