What we read this week (15 November)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

Research culture

Innovation

  • A new study in MIT Sloan Management Review sheds light on what separates innovation leaders from laggards and the key shifts executives must make to move into the leader category ” According to our research, 83% of innovation leaders agree that it’s important to decouple data from legacy infrastructure, compared with only 37% of innovation laggards. Leaders’ adoption of critical technologies that enable decoupling outpaces that of laggards by a massive margin: 97% versus 30%. By decoupling data from infrastructure, and using flexible architectures such as microservices, these top companies are able to respond quickly to demand and can scale with ease.”
  • Innov8rs Connect are running a free virtual summit with 100+ sessions covering the best and latest in corporate innovation. 9-13 December 2019. More info via https://innov8rs.co/connect-reg/

AI

 

What we read this week (8 November)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

AI

  • Creating the Symbiotic AI Workforce of the Future demonstrates how leaders can reimagine processes to “create greater business value and prepare for the next wave of innovation. In the long-standing argument about whether AI will replace or complement human beings, the new watchword is symbiosis”.
  • Arthur “A.J.” Boston looks at what AI means for libraries.
  • Purple DS look at how AI can support editorial teams. “Editorial teams should not to be spending time building hyperlinks, auto linking products, uploading stories. That’s what AI can do. Human writers will only be supported by AI, editorial jobs will become simpler and the average quality of our articles likely even better.”

Open source

Digital ethics

  • Sarah Burnett, Executive Vice President & Distinguished Analyst, Everest Group asks What is your company’s digital ethics score? “Every company today must have an evolving ethical digital strategy in order to restore trust among their consumers. Lofty and hollow corporate social responsibility statements won’t work. To change consumer sentiment, you need to put solid, trust-instilling policies into practice. “

Search and knowledge graphs

  • Computer Weekly on Search beyond search engines. “All-purpose search engines… have been valued at a median of US$17,530 a year (about £14,000) by 80,000 participants in a study published this year by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of Groningen. Respondents were asked how much compensation they would need to give up various digital services. Search engines were valued more than twice as much as email, nearly five times as much as online maps, and more than 50 times more than social media.”
  • Luc Boruta argues that PIDs Are Not Silver Bullets “There are billions of research objects that will never be assigned a PID — e.g. works published before the advent of DOIs, and most of the works that fall under the grey literature label — and objects that were assigned PIDs are not necessarily cited with mentions of these PIDs.” and writes about how  Cobaltmetrics are extending the PID Graph.
  • Nature Index on how the growth of papers is crowding out old classics. Hard to interpret the visualization but it’s eye catching. “An analysis led by Raj Kumar Pan, a computer scientist at Alto University in Finland, found that the number of academic papers is increasing by 4% each year. The total number of citations is growing by 5.6% each year, and doubling every 12 years. According to Alexander Petersen,co-author of the study, this huge volume of new articles isn’t just reshaping scientific publishing, it’s also changing how researchers “follow the reference trail”. Rather than sift through large volumes of new papers, researchers are opting for middle-aged articles that have gained greater visibility and more citations.”

 

What we read this week (2 August)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

Health Technology

  • KQ Labs, an intensive accelerator programme offered to high growth potential startup teams in the area of data-driven biomedical science, has opened up applications. Apply by 15 September.

User experience

 

Innovation

And finally…

A new approach to copyright – copying allowed providing you only write it out in green crayon :-):

What we read this week (8 February)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

  • First up are two articles about commenting. The Ringer has a piece about ‘how the New York Times Cooking became the best comments section on the Internet‘ by calling the section Notes. ““The call to action was to leave a note on the recipe that helps make it better. That’s very different from ‘Leave a comment on a recipe.’”  PLOS, on the other hand, are struggling to attract comments. A new study in the Journal of Information Science found “that publishers are yet to encourage significant numbers of readers to leave comments, with implications for the effectiveness of commenting as a means of collecting and communicating community perceptions of an article’s importance.” (H/T: InfoDocket). Perhaps a tweak to the wording asking for notes rather than comments might help?

Innovation

 

 

What we read this week (26 October)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

Open access

Blockchain

Ian Mulvany has some useful notes from the RAVE publishing conference where Blockchain seems to have been discussed at length. The Columbia Journalism Review has a nice summary of a meeting about what can blockchain actually do for journalism which discusses many of the same issues. The final comments,

“Ultimately, the panel said, the fate of blockchain journalism may hang on on whether the community of journalists keeps asking the hard questions about how to ensure that blockchain-based journalism serves and informs the public—and that control of the technology doesn’t fall into hands of the few.”

echo Ian’s reflection, “The claim of independence, in my mind does, not hold water. I think that would lead to vendor lock in as I don’t think that publishers will implement this tech on their own, without some standardisation we are going to end up depending on a vendor.”

Innovation

Bill Buxton explains why Marcel Proust and TS Eliot can be instructive for computer scientists, why the long nose of innovation is essential to success in technology design, why problem-setting is more important than problem-solving, and why we must remember, as we design our technologies, that every technological decision we make is an ethical decision as well in the Microsoft Research Podcast.

And finally…

A pair of smart glasses that you might actually want to wear:

What we read this week (13 July 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

OpenCitations announced the release of the Crossref Open Citation Index (#COCI) which contains open DOI-to-DOI citations extracted from Crossref. Crossref’s really useful participation reports show what percentage of a publisher’s content has 10 key metadata elements registered. Going through BMJ’s report we found out that some of our reference deposits are failing and we need to resubmit 🙁

Continue reading “What we read this week (13 July 2018)”

What we read this week (22 June 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Blockchain

As the Frankl token sale and the Scienceroot bounty program draw near Ian Mulvany has a thoughtful piece about blockchain technology in STEM. I’ve yet to see a killer application for blockchain, I can see how a blockchain based experimentation platform which uses smart contracts, something like breadboard, could be useful but it’s a fairly niche application. Perhaps The Remarkablz  team  can build a CryptoKitties style trading game where we can trade scientists and do strange breeding experiments to see what happens if you take Mary Anning (English paleontologist) and merge her with Zhang Heng (Chinese inventor and Astronomer)… or perhaps not! Continue reading “What we read this week (22 June 2018)”

What we read this week (11 May 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members. These are articles we’ve read and liked, things that made us think and things we couldn’t stop talking about.

Measuring impact and usage

Melissa Grant, Lucy Vernall and Kirsty Hill have measured the impact of health-related research broadcast on prime time television and found that participants’ understanding of the issues had been enhanced and some had changed their behaviours as a result of the research (research paper here). Continue reading “What we read this week (11 May 2018)”

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑