lingo.lol is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A place for linguists, philologists, and other lovers of languages.

Server stats:

61
active users

#LMICs

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

One year after launch, the #OpenAccess edition of the International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease finds that "OA is helping us to achieve our goal of improving knowledge dissemination in #LMICs, where there is restricted access to subscription journals. Citation analysis of the first few issues of IJTLD OPEN also suggests that this higher level of downloads [higher than for the non-OA edition] is leading to articles being cited at an accelerated rate."
ingentaconnect.com/content/iua

www.ingentaconnect.comA year in review – evaluating the launch of IJTLD OPEN: Ingenta Connect

"As part of the #treaty discussions, #LMICs are asking…public #funders of…research to require that…#pandemic-related #drugs…that result from [their] grants be shared equitably during a…health emergency…Funders could…require grantees to openly share study results…Funders could retain certain #IP rights to be used only when [necessary] to develop & distribute products equitably...However, the latest version of the treaty text does not include such provisions."
nature.com/articles/d41586-024

www.nature.comResearch funders must join the fight for equal access to medicinesPandemic treaty is a rare opportunity to ensure pandemic-related technologies are accessible and affordable to all.

Global research-and-development (R&D) investment works out to $1,286 per capita per year in high-income countries and just $42 in low and middle income countries.
nature.com/articles/d41586-023

The article focuses on "benevolent #patent extension" as a partial remedy. "An inventor who applies to patent a ‘benevolent discovery’ — one that targets LMICs’ needs — [can] offset the R&D costs by extending another patent, for a ‘non-essential’ product."

www.nature.com‘Benevolent’ patent extensions could raise billions for R&D in poorer countriesResearch into vaccines, crop seeds and other innovations for low- or middle-income nations could be rewarded by offering longer patent coverage for profitable, non-essential inventions.
#HICs#LMICs#North

I've seen 3 common explanations for why authors publish in #predatory journals: (1) they're deceived; (2) they're padding their resumes; (3) their work is weak.

This letter proposes a 4th, money.
nature.com/articles/d41586-023
(#paywalled)

"Many scientists from #LMICs…are rewarded with bonuses & promotions by their institutions [when they publish]…Many are likely to consider it worth paying an author publication charge [#APC] of $50 to secure a $300 research bonus for a guaranteed publication."

www.nature.comWhen authors play the predatory journals’ own gameLetter to the Editor
Replied in thread

3. Recent #GenerativeAI is one of the most expensive forms of computation to exists. Even from particularly simple problems, it takes significantly more energy.

Without understanding the constraints that exist in medical systems at #LMICs, can we really claim that this technology would be revolutionary?

For #BMGF to support these claims without sufficient critical analysis is counterproductive to both #AI and #HealthCare in #LMICs.

(n/n)

(n/n)

Survey of otolaryngology researchers in low and middle income countries:
journals.lww.com/co-otolaryngo

"96% of all study participants believed #APCs limit publication… 95% believed APCs…impede sharing of research that influences patient care."

LWWAre open access article processing charges affordable for... : Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck SurgeryAPCs and impact on publishing for otolaryngology trainees and otolaryngologists in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Recent findings A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among otolaryngology trainees and otolaryngologists in LMICs globally. Seventy-nine participants from 21 LMICs participated in the study, with the majority from lower middle-income status (66%). Fifty-four percent were otolaryngology lecturers while 30% were trainees. Eighty-seven percent of participants received a gross monthly salary of less than USD 1500. Fifty-two percent of trainees did not receive a salary. Ninety-one percent and 96% of all study participants believed APCs limit publication in open access journals and influence choice of journal for publication, respectively. Eighty percent and 95% believed APCs hinder career progression and impede sharing of research that influences patient care, respectively. Summary APCs are unaffordable for LMIC otolaryngology researchers, hinder career progression and inhibit the dissemination of LMIC-specific research that can improve patient care. Novel models should be developed to support open access publishing in LMICs....