Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Redefining Research Impact

1234f1a875369df95753efe40ee9471c?s=47 William Gunn
January 26, 2014

Redefining Research Impact

This talk was presented at the American Library Association Midwinter meeting in 2014.


William Gunn

January 26, 2014

More Decks by William Gunn

Other Decks in Research


  1. Redefining research impact William Gunn Head of Academic Outreach, Mendeley

    @mrgunn https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3555-2054
  2. None
  3. Citations are too slow

  4. Google Analytics for research

  5. New data on research impact  Get better data on

    researcher engagement with research  Get it faster  Serve all the stakeholders in research
  6. ...and aggregates research data in the cloud Mendeley extracts research

    data… Mendeley is not just a reference manager! Install Mendeley Desktop Collecting rich signals from domain experts.
  7. Rich user profile data

  8. Instrumenting the research workflow • 2.6 Million users • 470

    M documents • 4-700K uploads per day • 90% coverage of Pubmed • Accessible alternative to citations
  9. Instrumenting the Research Workflow Search Read Annotate Organize Write Import

  10. http://arxiv.org/html/1203.4745v1 altmetrics show broader impact

  11. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Apr-13/AprMay13_Lin_Fenner.html altmetrics show broader impact

  12. What would people build if they could get the data?

    • Impact Story – get credit for all your work • PLOS ALM – article-level metrics for papers • Plum Analytics – bespoke analytics for libraries (EBSCO) • Altmetric.com – altmetrics for publishers. (Digital Science)
  13. New data on research impact  Get better data on

    researcher engagement with research  Get it faster  Serve all the stakeholders in research
  14. Personalized Impact

  15. New forms of discovery • Mendeley Suggest – personalized recommendations

    based on reading history • related articles – relatedness based on document similarity • third-party platforms – PubChase, ScienceScape, myScienceWork, Docphin
  16. Secondary literature Off-line • Correspondence to journals • peer review

    Online • peer review • comments at publishers website (PLOS, PeerJ) • third-party platforms – Pubmed Commons, Publons, Stack Exchange, Quora, blog posts
  17. Secondary publication

  18. Secondary publication

  19. How authors use Pubmed Commons • Went public on Dec

    19. • ~700 comments • 1 in 5 are from authors • Commenters must have a paper in Pubmed to comment, but they’re publicly viewable • Comments can be cited by PMID http://pubmedcommonsblog.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2013/12/13/expanding-and-updating-the-record-authors-using-pubmed- commons/
  20. • 50% of comments – add study data – link

    to full free text – give updates related specifically to that publication – link to newer publications • 10% used it to add errata or notify readers that the conclusions no longer hold • only 2 used it to talk about how great their own paper is How authors use Pubmed Commons
  21. How authors use Pubmed Commons

  22. Issues To Be Addressed • Identity • Privacy • Attribution

    • Gaming • Filtration
  23. Identity • Mendeley - http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jonathan-eisen/ • Scopus - http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=352 47902700

    • Pubmed - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/myncbi/jonathan.eisen@g mail.com/comments/ • ORCID - http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0159-2197
  24. Building a reproducibility dataset • Mendeley and Science Exchange have

    started the Reproducibility Initiative • working with Figshare & PLOS to host data & replication reports • building open datasets backing high-impact work • http://cos.io/cancerbiology
  25. www.mendeley.com william.gunn@mendeley.com @mrgunn