CSE 2016 Annual Meeting

Communicating science to the average citizen – especially those who feel alienated by the research establishment – can seem daunting but is essential in a time when decisions need to be made about issues ranging from climate change to managing the spread of the Zika virus to dangerous lead exposures in countless communities. In this talk, Pulitzer-prize winning science journalist Deborah Blum – author of The Poisoner’s Handbook and director of the Knight Science Journalism Program at MIT – will explore some of the essential tools that journalists today use in connecting with the public on science issues.

Deborah Blum is a highly acclaimed science journalist and former president of the National Association of Science Writers. Ms. Blum is also co-editor of A Field Guide for Science Writers. Her work has been translated into more than a dozen languages, optioned for film, and has appeared in numerous publications, including The New York Times, Slate, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, Discover, and Health. She also is the Director of the Knight Science Journalism Program at MIT and is currently working on a new online magazine called Undark, launching this spring.

Speakers:

• Katherine Bennett, Managing Editor, American Society for Radiation Oncology
• Angela Cochran, Director, Journals, American Society of Civil Engineers
• Cara Kaufman, Managing Partner, Kaufman Wills Fusting & Company

Launching a new journal can be a daunting task. Many factors contribute and must be considered when the first discussions begin on the potential for a new journal. This session will highlight the planning and path on making the decision to begin a new journal, followed by the nuts and bolts from potential titles, choosing an editor, editorial workflow issues, marketing, timelines, and more. And finally, launching an open access journal will be highlighted.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understand what to consider when making a decision to launch a new journal.
2. Understand logistics when launching a new journal.
3. Know how to launch an open access journal.

Moderator:

Sheehan Misko, Associate Director & Senior Managing Editor, American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Speakers:

• Helen Atkins, Director, Publishing Services, Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• David Gillikin, Chief, Bibliographic Services Division, National Library of Medicine
• Trish Groves, MBBS, MRCPsych, Deputy Editor, The BMJ, Editor-in-Chief, BMJ Open

The session’s topic is the digital transition from publishing a journal focused mainly on print to publishing online first/only online. That includes letting the online publication be the archived and indexed version and letting go of page number as part of the article ID etc. The session will also focus on the possibility to publish content and create citations (in PubMed etc.) continuously instead of publishing and indexing whole issues at a time.

Learning Objectives:

1. Transition from print to online publishing.
2. Indexing and creating citations based on online content.
3. Continuous publication.

Moderator:

Merete Holtermann, Managing Editor, The Journal of The Norwegian Medical Association

Speakers:

• Esmeralda Buchanan, Senior Director, Journals and Books Publishing, American Cancer Society
• Brittany Campbell, Marketing Manager, National Academy of Sciences
• Jill Jackson, Manuscript Processing & Publishing Administrator, American College of Physicians
• Kerry Kroffe, Senior Editorial Manager, PLOS ONE
• Jeanette Panning, Assistant Director, Publications Programs, American Geophysical Union
• Sarah Tegen, PhD, Vice President, Global Editorial & Author Services, American Chemical Society

The session will consist of lightning talks delivered by presenters describing their work-related, practical questions and how they used data to draw informed answers. Topics include the following:

• Are my users my customers?
• Should we increase our frequency of publication and page budget?
• How do I determine the most effective reminder strategy to ensure the most efficient peer review times?
• Who in the world is accessing our publications? And how do we target them?
• How can I use data to understand the editorial and production strengths and weaknesses of my journal compared to competing journals?
• How can we reach our audience on social media?

Come prepared to appreciate that many things can be counted but some things are not easily measured.

Learning Objectives:

1. Learn from a variety of case studies how individuals have used data to address editorial and publishing questions.
2. Understand what data is available and how it may be used for the session topics.

Moderator:

Jill Jackson, Manuscript Processing & Publishing Administrator, American College of Physicians

Speakers:

• Jennifer Nyborg, Professor, Colorado State University
• Kathryn Partin, Director, Office of Research Integrity
• Joseph Rosse, Associate Vice Chancellor of Research Integrity & Compliance, University of Colorado at Boulder
• Heather Tierney, PhD, Managing Editor, Journals and Ethics Policy, American Chemical Society

In the publishing community, allegations of ethical misconduct can be investigated by the journal or escalated to a university compliance office or other advisory boards such as the Office of Research Integrity in the US (or another respective body abroad) for adjudication. All of these different investigative bodies can have differing goals when they investigate alleged misconduct, and these goals can dictate different practices. These same groups also educate constituents to prevent ethical misconduct.

The speakers in this session will discuss the goals and practices of ethical misconduct investigations in their organization. They will also discuss programs to prevent ethical misconduct.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understand why different investigative bodies have different goals and practices when examining alleged misconduct.
2. Learn about programs to educate and prevent ethical misconduct.

Moderators:

Anne Coghill, Manager, Peer Review Operations, American Chemical Society

Speakers:

• Judy Connors, Associate Director, Editorial Services Managing Editor, TIRS/GF, The Drug Information Association (DIA)
• James MacGregor, Publishing Services Coordinator, Public Knowledge Project
• Charlie Rapple, Sales & Marketing Director, Co-Founder, Kudos

This session will provide participants with several proven solutions to make a large impact on their journals with a small budget. Although the session is primarily geared toward small journals, all journal publishers face resource and budget constraints and can benefit from tips to maximize their resources. Topic areas will include marketing techniques with a small staff; networking and social media; and an option for a low-cost peer-review tracking system. Upon completion of the session, participants will be able to utilize speakers experiences to implement large impact strategies at their own journals for no to little additional cost.

Learning Objectives:

1. Participants will learn how to utilize a small staff and additional relationships to generate ideas and successfully implement big impact changes.
2. Participants will learn how Kudos can help them broaden readership and increase the impact of their research.
3. Participants will gain an understanding of Open Journal Systems (OJS), developed by the Public Knowledge Project and how their journal/s can utilize this freely available, open source software.

Moderator:

Mary Beth Schaeffer

Speakers:

• Mary L. Chang, ELS, Publications Manager, American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Liz Krznarich, Software Engineer/UI Design, ORCID
• Jennifer Lin, Director of Product Management, CrossRef
• Sarah McCormack, Assistant Director of Editorial and Production Operations, American Society for Nutrition
• David Mellor, PhD, Project Manager, Center for Open Science
• Kristen Overstreet, Senior Partner, Origin Editorial
• May Piotrowski, Editorial Director, American Academy of Ophthalmology
• Gillian Shasby, Director of Publications-Operations, JNS Publishing Group
• Elaine Williams, Director, Editorial Systems and Administration, The JAMA Network

The best questions, and their answers, are often encountered during informal discussions with others who have happened upon the same situations and concerns. This session will provide you with the opportunity to choose from nine topics over two 25 minute rounds of discussion. Bring a question, an answer, or just your curiosity

2016 Topics:

• CME Credit
• Strategic Planning for a Journal
• Interactive Quality Checklist in the Editorial Office
• What happens when you reduce peer review durations?
• Rebranding
• When Policy Changes Mean Important Changes to the Instructions for Authors
• ORCID Reviewer Credit & Publisher ORCID Mandates
• Registering Content with Crossref Before Online Availability
• Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines

Learning Objectives:

1. Engage in an open discussion with other Editors on a variety of topics.
2. Ask questions, or provide answers, relating to your experience(s) with the topic.

Moderator:

Anna Jester, Director of Sales & Marketing, eJournalPress

Speaker:

• David Gillikin, Chief, Bibliographic Services Division, National Library of Medicine
• Charlotte Kent, PhD, Executive Editor, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Allyson Mower, MA, MLIS, Associate Librarian and Head, Scholarly Communication & Copyright, University of Utah, J. Willard Marriott Library

To meet the evolving needs of readers and to keep abreast of technological advances, the indexed literature must integrate the flexibility and functionality inherent to a living (or dynamic) document posted on the Internet. This session will be conducted in a new format, similar to an interactive Town Hall. The panelists will frame the issues and the audience will be invited to think creatively and collectively to outline a solution. Put on your thinking cap and be part of this first CSE “publication puzzler.”

Medical and scientific societies publish practice guidelines in the indexed literature. These guidelines are static and often become outdated shortly after publication. The indexed literature is an authoritative and credible source, in part, due to a journals credibility and value-added from editorial or peer review. In addition, it provides enhanced discoverability (e.g., MEDLINE) and meets the ingrained expectations of users. Despite these benefits, it has limitations because, to be effective, guidelines must be updated in real-time to reflect the current best-practices. Therefore, authors must select increasingly between the index literature and web-based platforms, but neither offer a comprehensive solution. The Internet can accommodate iterative content, but it doesnt archive the successive changes in a rigorous or standard method and lacks the value-added of scholarly publishing. Will the future herald a new publication format; where journal article meets wiki?

Learning Objectives:

1. To describe the need, benefit and role of living documents in scholarly publishing.
2. To characterize the limits of indexed literature regarding dynamic publishing.
3. To solicit creative solutions regarding how the flexibility and functionality inherent to a living (or dynamic) document can be integrated into the indexed literature.

Moderator:

Christine Casey, MD, Editor, MMWR Serials, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Speakers:

• Meghan Byrne, PhD, Senior Editor, PLOS ONE
• Abraham Haileamlak, MD, Professor, Jimma University

There is a growing consensus that data generated in clinical trials and in all areas of science need to be shared. The rationale behind requiring data sharing and the practical aspects of sharing have been the subject of much discussion and many lessons have been learned as requirements are proposed and/or imposed.

In 2016, the ICMJE published a set of proposed requirements for the sharing of de-identified individual patient data from the clinical trials published in its member journals. Requiring sharing of clinical trial data has raised questions of “how?” and “with whom?”
Publishers of fundamental research across a wide range of biology and medicine that require data availability for acceptance to publication must answer these questions, as well as “why” and “when”. How they are doing so has yielded important findings.
This session will focus on the rationale and practices for data sharing across science — what journals need to do, what are the challenges for researchers, editors, and publishers, and what are the benefits that result.

Learning Objectives:

1. Know the ICMJE definitions of clinical trial.
2. Describe the ICMJE proposed Mechanisms of acquiring deidentified patient data.
3. What are the justifications for data sharing requirements.
4. Understand the responsibility of funders, authors and researchers, institutions, editors, and publishers.
5. Discuss the challenges for the researchers who are to share their data and the editors who publish them.
6. Learn how a data sharing requirement was implemented at a specific journal or publisher and tips for those who have yet to do this.

Moderator:

Mary Beth Schaeffer, Managing Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine

Speakers:

• James Galipeau, PhD, Knowledge Synthesis Group, Clinical Epidemiology Program
• David Riley, MD, Associate Editor, The Permanente Journal; Executive Editor, AIHM Journal Club; Helfgott Research Institute, Adjunct Faculty; Board Member, Academy of Integrative Health and Medicine

The EQUATOR Network curates reporting guidelines for studies published in health and medical journals and also publishes other resources for study authors. This session will describe EQUATORs work to improve the value of medical research by promoting transparent and accurate reporting of studies and also outline the steps of guideline development. The session includes a presentation about a guideline under development to determine core competencies for editors of medical/scientific journals. The development of this guideline was initiated to provide material for formal training for biomedical editors so that they can perform more effectively in their roles.

Learning Objectives:

1. Learn what the EQUATOR Network offers to authors and editors.
2. Learn how reporting guidelines are developed.
3. Learn about the development of a new guideline for core competencies for medical/scientific editors .

Moderator:

Patricia Baskin, MS, Executive Editor, Neurology Journals, American Academy of Neurology

Speakers:

• Jennifer Laloup, Editorial Media Manager, PLOS
• Preeti Malani, MD, MSJ, Associate Editor, JAMA; Director of Media Relations, JAMA Network; Professor of Medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases, The University of Michigan
• Alexandra Witze, Correspondent, Nature

This session will discuss ways science editors can work collaboratively with mainstream media organizations by exploring the “news media supply chain” – the process of identifying research articles worthy of a press release; of working with in-house staff and/or science writers to write effective press releases; of coordinating with university/funder/institutional press offices to promote their organizations’ output; on working with Eurekalert! and similar embargoing service platforms that make your content available to journalists; on embargo process and policies that provides fairness to journalists wishing to write about your research; and on tools for tracking media coverage as part of Article Level Metrics.

Learning Objectives:

1. Attendees will learn about the process for creating press releases for scientific articles.
2. Attendees will learn about ways to distribute those press releases so they are used by journalists.
3. Attendees will learn helpful tips from journalists and science writers that will make their press releases more likely to be used.
4. Attendees will hear some suggestions on how to track media coverage.

Moderator:

Mark Johnson, Director, Contributor Experience & Product Marketing, PLOS

Speakers:

• Charlie Rapple, Sales & Marketing Director, Co-Founder, Kudos
• Donald Samulack, PhD, U.S. Operations, Editage/Cactus Communications
• Nick Shockey, Director of Programs & Engagement, SPARC, Director, Right to Research Coalition

With the number of journals growing at roughly 3.5% annually, and the professional pressure to publish greater than ever before, the lure of predatory journals is increasingly problematic. In this session, our speakers will discuss how best to identify predatory publishers, the impact they are having in the STM publishing industry, and effective ways to avoid them when submitting your own work. Toward the end attendees will learn about the “Think. Check. Submit.” campaign.

Learning Objectives:

1. What is a predatory journal?
2. What is the prevalence and impact of predatory journals in STM publishing?
3. What are the best ways to identify and avoid submitting to predatory journals?

Moderator:

Ken Heideman, Director of Publications, American Meteorological Society

Speakers:

• Jennifer Lin, CrossRef
• Joelle Masciulli, Head of Research Discovery, Thomson Reuters
• Joe Rosse, PhD, Associate Vice Chancellor of Research Integrity & Compliance, University of Colorado at Boulder

This session will review what happens after a journal retracts a paper. Studies have shown that retracted papers continue to be cited as if they have never been retracted. Speakers will cover topics such as what happens in abstract databases when a paper is retracted, how best to alert readers that a paper has been retracted, and how to prevent retracted papers from being cited in new papers.

Learning Objectives:

1. Review best practices for correcting the literature, particularly with regard to retractions.
2. A behind the scenes peak at what happens down the road with indexing services when you retract a paper.
3. Tips for how best to ensure that readers everywhere, accessing content from different places, know that a paper has been retracted.

Moderator:

Kelly Anderson, Managing Editor, American Society of Civil Engineers

Speakers:

• Anita Bandrowski, Specialist, Center For Research in Biological System, University of California, San Diego
• Tamara Hanna, PhD,Acquisitions Editor, American Chemical Society
• Meredith Morovati, Executive Director, Dryad

“Big data” has been a buzzword in scholarly publishing for the past several years as all stakeholders grapple with what that phrase means to academic publishing. Each field has varying needs for data file types relevant to its community, requiring different platforms and tools to facilitate collaboration, analyzation, and publication. Only in recent years has the tidal wave of big data made its way to the shores of editorial offices, forcing journal staff to seek to understand what it means for day-to-day journal operations. This session is designed to provide some answers, from the policies and philosophies set by funders and publishers, to a journal case study involving the integration of large data files into the peer review process, to a nonprofit providing the technological framework for including large data files in peer review and publication systems.

Learning Objectives:

1. Learn about the cultural shift in academic publishing that is embracing data and resource publication/sharing and its implications for reproducibility in science.
2. Lessons learned from a journal that added data review to their peer review process. System creation, submission platform integration, and author/reviewer experience will be discussed.
3. Hear from one data repository vendor on trends theyre seeing in the demand for data storage and sharing among journals and publishers.

Moderator:

Brittany White, Editorial Services Coordinator, J&J Editorial

Speakers:

• Angela Cochran, Director, Journals, American Society of Civil Engineers
• Ken Heideman, Director of Publications, American Meteorological Society
• Lauren Kane, COO, BioOne
• Louise Page, Publisher, PLOS
• Charlie Rapple, Sales & Marketing Director, Co-Founder, Kudos

While scholarly publishing as a profession attracts more women than men, recent demographic surveys illustrate a sizeable gender gap among the industry’s senior leadership. While many acknowledge the problems posed by this disparity, there is less agreement surrounding what can be done to correct it. In an effort to continue discussions on this important topic, this session is a continuation of a session of the same title presented at the 2015 SSP Annual Meeting. Panelists will focus on concrete ways that the industry and its members can support a more diverse leadership, including a discussion of the importance of speaking opportunities for professional advancement.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understanding of scholarly publishing demographics.
2. Discussion of concrete ways to promote gender equity among top leadership positions.
3. Collection of ideas on how CSE and its peer organizations can support a strong, diverse industry.

Moderator:

Lauren Kane, COO, BioOne

Speakers:

• Art Gertel, Principal, MedSciComm
• Trish Groves, MBBS, MRCPsych, Head of Research, BMJ; Editor-in-Chief, BMJ Open
• Renu Juneja, MedImmune
• Mina Patel, Senior Director, Scientific Communications, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Tatjana Poplazarova, PhD, Vice President, Vaccines Office of Medical Governance & Bioethics, GSK

Many research sponsors review manuscripts before submission. Such reviews may be helpful for fact checking or protecting intellectual property but there is little guidance as to what constitutes helpful review. This session will hear from sponsors to understand current practices for providing publication review and editors to hear their viewpoint. The session will then discuss what sponsors and editors would consider good practice.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understand some of the regulations/guidelines that sponsors have to adhere to.
2. Understand current practices for manuscript review by sponsors (e.g. pharmaceutical companies).
3. Learn how journals can encourage greater transparency of the review processes.

Moderator:

Dr. Elizabeth Wager, Publications Consultant, Sideview

Speakers:

• David Crotty, PhD, Editorial Director, Journals Policy, Oxford University Press
• Michael Levine-Clark, Interim Dean and Director, University of Denver Libraries
• Neil Thakur, PhD, Special Assistant to the Deputy Director for Extramural Research and Program Manager of NIH Public Access Policy, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of Extramural Research

Research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is required to be publicly accessible upon publication. In this session we look at the mandate and how publishers and libraries are responding. We will discuss the role of CHORUS, researcher access, and PubMed Central. For historical context, we will look at the tense relationship between The National Library of Medicine (NLM) and publishers, and thoughts on how they can work as partners rather than competitors.

Learning Objectives:

1. Learn about Public Access Mandates, and how they affect your publication.
2. Understand the role of CHORUS and funding as it relates to the National Library of Medicine (NLM).
3. Discuss the relationship between the NLM and publishers from a historical perspective.
4. Provide directions for the NLM/PubMedCentral and publishers to work together in harmony.

Moderator:

Michael Casp, Production Services Coordinator, J&J Editorial

Tuesday, 17 May, 2016