Version 1
: Received: 8 November 2020 / Approved: 9 November 2020 / Online: 9 November 2020 (16:02:24 CET)
How to cite:
Delikoura, E.; Kouis, D. Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece. Preprints2020, 2020110282. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202011.0282.v1
Delikoura, E.; Kouis, D. Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece. Preprints 2020, 2020110282. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202011.0282.v1
Delikoura, E.; Kouis, D. Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece. Preprints2020, 2020110282. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202011.0282.v1
APA Style
Delikoura, E., & Kouis, D. (2020). Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202011.0282.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Delikoura, E. and Dimitris Kouis. 2020 "Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202011.0282.v1
Abstract
During the last years, significant initiatives have been launched for the dissemination of Open Access as part of the Open Science movement. Nevertheless, the other major pillars of Open Science such as Open Research Data (ORD) and Open Peer Review (OPR) are still in an early stage of development among the communities of researchers and stakeholders. The present study sought to unveil the perceptions of a medical and health sciences community about these issues. Through the investigation of researchers’ attitude, valuable conclusions can be drawn, especially in the field of medicine and health sciences, where an explosive growth of scientific publishing exists. A quantitative survey was conducted based on a structured questionnaire, with 51.8% response rate (215 responses out of 415 electronic invitations). The participants in the survey agreed with the ORD principles However they ignored basic terms like FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) and appeared incentive to permit the exploitation of their data. Regarding OPR, participants expressed their agreement, implying their interest for a trustworthy evaluation system. Conclusively, researchers urge to receive proper training for both ORD principles and OPR processes which combined with a reformed evaluation system will enable them to take full advantage of the opportunities that arise from the new scholar publishing and communication landscape.
Keywords
Open Research Data; Open Peer Review; medicine; health sciences; Open Science; Open Access; health scientists; FAIR
Subject
Business, Economics and Management, Accounting and Taxation
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
