Complying with the NSF’s New Public Access Policy and Depositing a Manuscript in NSF-PAR

In 2016 the National Science Foundation (NSF) rolled out its new online public access repository, NSF-PAR for investigators funded by the NSF to deposit their manuscripts to comply with its new Public Access Policy. The NSF’s policy and its new publications repository differ in several key ways from the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) public access policy and PMC, particularly in terms of requirements for compliance and procedures for deposit. While NIH grants may make up the majority of biomedical institutions’ research funds, the NSF is also an important source of biomedical funding, especially for career awards, research training grants, and translational research. In this webinar we will walk participants through the requirements for compliance and the process for deposit and share insights provided by the NSF Policy Office

The Research Data Management Interview

This presentation was given as part of the RDAP Summit, 2019 Train-the-Trainer: Developing a Research Data Management Workshop to Support Graduate Student NSF Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant ProposalsPresenters: Andrew Creamer (Brown University), Hope Lappen (New York University), Sam Simas (Bryant University)Workshop Objectives: Participants will be able to:1. Teach graduate student researchers to navigate Research.gov and FastLane and provide overview of solicitation, supplementary document requirements, and public access compliance requirements, including depositing in NSF-PAR 2. Point out common pitfalls for graduate students navigating and complying with solicitation and PAPPG 3. Conduct an evaluation of students previously funded DDRIGs regarding their projects’ data collection and documentation needs and lessons learned to incorporate into the workshops Pull together a resource list of experts and offices to support data storage, data security, intellectual property, and ethics to support their research goals 4. Consult on directorate-specific Data Management Plans for their proposed DDRI projects that integrate library research data management resources among others, and help students locate and integrate data documentation standards utilized by the repositories and journals in their field 5. Consult on the development of students’ Broader Impacts plan for their DDRI project

Adapting the Library Repository to Accommodate Research Data, Publications, and Partnering with Researchers

Brown University Library originally created the Brown Digital Repository (BDR) in 2011 to serve the digital content storage and dissemination needs of its Special Collections and Center for Digital Scholarship (CDS). Since then, the BDR has evolved to serve a broader group of stakeholders, including the science librarians, who deposit researchers’ data along with the supplementary materials underlying their publications, collections of data to comply with a grant-funder’s requirements for data sharing, and faculty publications. Some university library systems have created separate repositories for data, such as the Universities of Michigan and Minnesota. However, for libraries at smaller institutions, having a separate system for images, publications, and data may not be the most-feasible or affordable short-term solution. Over the last year, Brown’s science librarians and developers have been planning to make enhancements and changes to the BDR to improve its ingest, dissemination, and overall capabilities for preserving the long-term access of research data as well as make the necessary adaptations to the way that the BDR collects faculty publications, with the aim of it being a resource to help researchers with retaining their final approved manuscripts and complying with their funders’ public access policies. These shifts, from a focus on ingesting and displaying images to a focus on data and publications have exposed many issues and challenges that librarians considering adapting their existing repositories to accommodate data and public access mandates should hear. At the same time, the Library has been working with the Brown Center for Biomedical Informatics to integrate its science librarians and repository infrastructure into grant-funded projects, such as an NLM Administrative Supplement for Informationist Services. In the second half of the session, Dr. Neil Sarkar, the Director of the Brown Center for Biomedical Informatics, and Principal Investigator on the NLM Administrative Supplement, will provide a keynote address, which will cover: (1) faculty perspectives academic libraries should have in mind while adapting their repositories for tracking and making available their faculty’s scholarly output; (2) ways libraries can develop infrastructure to partner with their faculty on research projects and grant-funded initiatives, such as clinical and translational science; (3) ways that libraries could integrate their repositories into existing systems for recording scholarly output, such as My NCBI’s My Bibliography as well as systems for displaying researcher and scholarship ontologies such as VIVO; and (4) ways that libraries can adapt their repositories to provide meaningful analytics and metrics for measuring the impact of their researcher communities

State of the Science of Scale-Up of Cancer Prevention and Early Detection interventions in Low- and Middle-income Countries: a Scoping Review

PURPOSE: Cancer deaths in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) will nearly double by 2040. Available evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer prevention and early detection can reduce cancer-related mortality, yet there is a lack of evidence on effectively scaling these EBIs in LMIC settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to identify published literature from six databases between 2012 and 2022 that described efforts for scaling cancer prevention and early detection EBIs in LMICs. Included studies met one of two definitions of scale-up: (1) deliberate efforts to increase the impact of effective intervention to benefit more people or (2) an intervention shown to be efficacious on a small scale expanded under real-world conditions to reach a greater proportion of eligible population. Study characteristics, including EBIs, implementation strategies, and outcomes used, were summarized using frameworks from the field of implementation science. RESULTS: This search yielded 3,076 abstracts, with 24 studies eligible for inclusion. Included studies focused on a number of cancer sites including cervical (67%), breast (13%), breast and cervical (13%), liver (4%), and colon (4%). Commonly reported scale-up strategies included developing stakeholder inter-relationships, training and education, and changing infrastructure. Barriers to scale-up were reported at individual, health facility, and community levels. Few studies reported applying conceptual frameworks to guide strategy selection and evaluation. CONCLUSION: Although there were relatively few published reports, this scoping review offers insight into the approaches used by LMICs to scale up cancer EBIs, including common strategies and barriers. More importantly, it illustrates the urgent need to fill gaps in research to guide best practices for bringing the implementation of cancer EBIs to scale in LMICs

State of the Science of Scale-Up of Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

PURPOSECancer deaths in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) will nearly double by 2040. Available evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer prevention and early detection can reduce cancer-related mortality, yet there is a lack of evidence on effectively scaling these EBIs in LMIC settings.METHODSWe conducted a scoping review to identify published literature from six databases between 2012 and 2022 that described efforts for scaling cancer prevention and early detection EBIs in LMICs. Included studies met one of two definitions of scale-up: (1) deliberate efforts to increase the impact of effective intervention to benefit more people or (2) an intervention shown to be efficacious on a small scale expanded under real-world conditions to reach a greater proportion of eligible population. Study characteristics, including EBIs, implementation strategies, and outcomes used, were summarized using frameworks from the field of implementation science.RESULTSThis search yielded 3,076 abstracts, with 24 studies eligible for inclusion. Included studies focused on a number of cancer sites including cervical (67%), breast (13%), breast and cervical (13%), liver (4%), and colon (4%). Commonly reported scale-up strategies included developing stakeholder inter-relationships, training and education, and changing infrastructure. Barriers to scale-up were reported at individual, health facility, and community levels. Few studies reported applying conceptual frameworks to guide strategy selection and evaluation.CONCLUSIONAlthough there were relatively few published reports, this scoping review offers insight into the approaches used by LMICs to scale up cancer EBIs, including common strategies and barriers. More importantly, it illustrates the urgent need to fill gaps in research to guide best practices for bringing the implementation of cancer EBIs to scale in LMICs