Logo

Open Science's Greatest Need Is ... Non-Scientists?

Jul 03, 2009

Pawel Szczesny at Freelancing Science has a post considering models of open science, and how best to encourage it. For one thing, he says, it would be helpful to test various models outside the scientific arena: "Principles of Open Source software did not prove to be useful in open drug development. ... Crowdsourcing will not advance quantum physics," he writes. "Open Science in its fullest form is not an issue that scientists can truly solve by themselves."

In a post he advises readers to "take with a pinch of salt," Neil Saunders has a post on social bookmarking options offered on journal websites. PLoS and BioMed Central clearly get it, he says, but a snapshot of the bookmarks available at Nature (limited to Connotea) leaves Saunders asking, "So NPG: is it 'we promote sharing' or 'we promote sharing so long as you use our service?'"

Breaking News
The Scan

Study Finds Few FDA Post-Market Regulatory Actions Backed by Research, Public Assessments

A Yale University-led team examines in The BMJ safety signals from the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System and whether they led to regulatory action.

Duke University Team Develops Programmable RNA Tool for Cell Editing

Researchers have developed an RNA-based editing tool that can target specific cells, as they describe in Nature.

Novel Gene Editing Approach for Treating Cystic Fibrosis

Researchers in Science Advances report on their development of a non-nuclease-based gene editing approach they hope to apply to treat cystic fibrosis.

Study Tracks Responses in Patients Pursuing Polygenic Risk Score Profiling

Using interviews, researchers in the European Journal of Human Genetics qualitatively assess individuals' motivations for, and experiences with, direct-to-consumer polygenic risk score testing.