18新利体育苹果|18海外新利

https://becker.wustl.edu Wed, 19 Jun 2024 22:43:04 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.3.4 https://becker.wustl.edu/wp-content/uploads/cropped-favicon-32x32.png https://becker.wustl.edu 32 32 146896201 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/tips-for-writing-nih-data-management-and-sharing-plans/ Wed, 19 Jun 2024 04:00:09 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21569 &＃160; [Read more]]]> The National Institutes of Health (NIH) requires a Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMSP) in all competing applications that generate scientific data. A DMSP should cover six key elements as outlined in NOT-OD-21-014.  While not required, using a DMSP template helps researchers address all six elements and sub-elements required by the NIH DMS policy. The most widely used DMSP template is the optional DMSP format page (Fig 1).  However, two updated pilot templates, Alpha (Fig 2) and Bravo (Fig 3) were released in 2023 with the opportunity to provide feedback to the NIH (NIH Extramural Nexus announcement on November 30, 2023).  This blog will provide practical tips for writing a strong DMSP based on more than 100 submitted DMSPs and public feedback from four NIH Institutes (NICHD, NCI, NIMH, and NIBIB). I’ll provide general tips as well as element-specific guidance to help you write successful DMSPs for your NIH applications.  Fig 1: 2022 Optional NIH DMSP Format Page Fig 2: 2023 FDP NIH DMS Pilot Template Alpha Fig 3: 2023 FDP NIH DMS Pilot Template Bravo General Tips Tip #1: First, determine whether the  NIH Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) policy applies to your study, including IC-specific thresholds (e.g. NCI thresholds). Second, determine if your research is considered human subjects research using decision tools (Decision Tool, Flowchart, Infographic). Finally, determine if your research involves secondary analysis.  Answering these questions helps NIH staff review your DMSP and sets a framework for your DMSP because it affects which data/when/where/how to share. If you use the 2023 FDP Pilot DMSP templates, these questions are asked upfront, but if using the 2022 optional format page, add this information in “Element 1”.   Tip #2: Create a table listing all data types in your research strategy plan. It is important to list “all” data types, not just selective data types you think are sharable. For each data type, include a brief description that includes:  the source (human, animal, cell lines, existing datasets for secondary analysis, etc.), shared data file format, amount (file size in GB/TB or the number of animals or human participants), and the designated repository for your data type. Although NOT-OD-21-014 doesn&＃8217;t explicitly require a data source, recent feedback from NIH ICs suggests including a source since it affects subsequent DMSP elements. The data table should be added in Element 1A of the Optional Format page or enter the information into the existing table in the Alpha or Bravo templates. Tip #3: Identify the appropriate data repositories that meet the desirable characteristics of data repositories for federally funded research for each data type. Discuss repository options with your program officer (PO) if uncertain. Utilize the decision tree for repository selection and explore resources for finding a repository.  WashU offers two institutional data repositories that can accept all data types: Digital Commons Data@Becker, managed by Becker Medical Library for the School of Medicine, and the WashU Research Data Repository (WURD), managed by University Libraries for those on the Danforth Campus. NIH Optional DMSP Format Page Guidance Element 1: Data Type A) Types and amount of scientific data expected to be generated in the project: As mentioned in Tip #1, determine whether the NIH Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) policy applies to your study, then state whether your project involves human subjects research and secondary analysis. Then organize your data types using a table, as described in Tip #2. The NIH also expects you to describe where each data type will be managed before it is placed in a public repository for sharing. This is especially important if you use a local storage platform that incurs a cost (e.g., RIS, Data Lake, Center for Genome Sciences Computational Cluster, WUBIOS facility, etc.). Local data management considerations are an allowable DMS cost, but the DMS budget justification must be based on your DMSP, so please ensure that your DMS budget justification aligns with the information provided in your DMSP! B) Scientific data that will be preserved and shared, and the rationale for doing so: Clearly state which data will be preserved and shared and justify any limitations on data sharing. SBIR/STTR applicants are permitted to withhold applicable data for up to 20 years after the award date, by including this NIH recommended statement.  If you are doing secondary analyses on previously shared data, you do not need to reshare the existing, shared primary data, but any new, derived data generated as a result of secondary analyses are expected to be shared, unless the use of data obtained from repositories or other sources and derived data is subject to limitations on sharing as a condition of access. Not all data generated during NIH-supported research will constitute scientific data under the DMS Policy. Please see the example exclusion criteria on the FAQ page. Also, the NIH acknowledges that data sharing may have limitations and provides examples of justifiable reasons for restricting sharing. Please cite specific reasons (e.g., GDPR requirements or specific laws) rather than using vague language such as “legal” considerations. C) Metadata, other relevant data, and associated documentation: Describe any additional information necessary for others to interpret your data.  Examples of associated documentation include study protocols, data dictionaries, survey instruments, and readme files. Data-type-specific metadata are typically collected by domain-specific repositories (e.g., ImmPort Data Model, GEO etc.) via sample submission templates, so be prepared to provide this metadata for each data type. If you are using generalist repositories, including WashU institutional data repositories (Digital Commons Data@Becker or WURD), they typically use the DataCite metadata schema to collect searchable study-level metadata. If you select Digital Commons Data@Becker for your data types, please refer to the DMSP Template for Digital Commons Data@Becker. Element 2: Related Tools, Software, and/or Code This section focuses on what will be required for “others” to open your data files and perform further analysis. This may not be the same tools “you” used to collect and process the data. It is recommended that you convert your data files from proprietary formats to open file formats before placing them in a data repository (See Element 3 below) so that others can use publicly available open-source software to access and further process your data. If custom code is necessary to reproduce your results, make it publicly available in a repository like GitHub. Mention the availability of your code in this section and note that the GitHub repository will be archived with Zenodo to obtain a DOI for citation, which can be included in your publications, RPPRs, and Biosketch. Element 3: Standards This element focuses on achieving the interoperability of FAIR data principles. To ensure interoperability, convert your shared files into open file formats and adhere to community-accepted standards and ontologies. Before concluding that there are no widely accepted standards for your data types, please check for standards on fairsharing.org, the largest database for standards and ontologies. Also, the NIDDK Data and Metadata Standards Examples for DMS Plans and NICHD Data Standards Resources can guide you in writing this section. Element 4: Data Preservation, Access, and Associated Timelines A) Repository where scientific data and metadata will be archived: If you have included repositories for each data type in the table in Element 1A, you can simply state that data will be archived in the repositories mentioned in Table 1.  If not, you can list the names of domain-specific data repositories for each data type or a generalist repository that can accept all data types. B) How scientific data will be findable and identifiable: Your data will be findable and identifiable via the Persistent Unique Identifiers (PIDs) assigned to your dataset by the data repositories (e.g., DOIs, Accession numbers). C) When and how long the scientific data will be made available: The duration that your data will be accessible depends on the retention policy of the data repositories you choose. Ensure that you choose a data repository that meets the minimum data retention period required by the NIH (3 years) and your institution (6 years for WashU). In addition, the NIH DMS policy requires that data should be shared at the time of associated publications or the end of the award period, whichever comes first. However, if your study is subject to the NIH GDS Policy, consult the expectations outlined in the &＃8220;Data Submission and Release Expectations for Genomic Data&＃8221; guidance and include them in this section. Element 5: Access, Distribution, or Reuse Considerations A) Factors affecting subsequent access, distribution, or reuse of scientific data: If your data is subject to patent applications or license agreements or if your project involves human subjects research, several potential factors might affect the subsequent access, distribution, or reuse of your data.  Check potential justifiable factors listed by the NIH and confirm those that apply to your data with the Joint Research Office for Contracts (JROC) and the Human Research Protection Office (HRPO). If you are generating whole genome sequencing from HeLa cells, check the NIH sample plan on HeLa Cell WGS and follow the guidelines in NOT-OD-24-098. If your study is subject to the NIH GDS policy, indicate if your study should be designated as “sensitive” for the purposes of access to Genomic Summary Results (GSR), as described in NOT-OD-19-023. B) Whether access to scientific data will be controlled: If your data is generated from non-human sources, the NIH expects data to be shared openly without access restrictions. If your data is human-derived, check with HRPO/IRB to confirm which data can be shared (de-identified individual participant data vs. aggregated summary data) and the appropriate level of access (open vs. controlled). C) Protections for privacy, rights, and confidentiality of human research participants: Outline the measures you will implement to protect the privacy, rights, and confidentiality of human participants. These steps might involve de-identifying data by removing personally identifiable information (PII), obtaining a certificate of confidentiality, or implementing other suitable protective measures like access control and HIPAA training. When addressing this section, adhere to the guidelines provided in NOT-OD-213 and NOT-OD-214. Element 6: Oversight of Data Management and Sharing In this section, various NIH Sample DMSPs discuss institutional oversight. However, it is important to clarify that NIH does not currently mandate institutional oversight. Instead, sponsoring institutions have the flexibility to handle oversight based on their individual circumstances. At WashU, the Office of Sponsored Research Services (OSRS) has addressed this matter by assigning data management responsibility and sharing oversight to Principal Investigators (PIs). PIs are responsible for ensuring compliance with the approved DMSP. For WashU investigators seeking guidance, sample language for Element 6 can be found in the Example DMS Plans in the ICTS WUSTL Grants Library or DMSP Template for Digital Commons Data@Becker. Finally, before you write a DMSP from scratch, be sure to check out Sample DMS Plans on the BeckerDMS website, which include NIH sample DMS Plans, examples DMS Plans in the WUSTL Grants Library (Submitted or Awarded), and Featured DMS Plans in DMPTool. These samples provide a great starting point to create a custom DMSP for your project. I hope you find these tips helpful! If you have any questions or would like personal assistance in reviewing your DMSP, please email [email protected] or request a consultation via the BeckerDMS website. Resources NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy DMSP Template for Digital Commons Data@Becker NOT-OD-21-014 (Elements of an NIH Data Management and Sharing Plan) FDP Data Management and Sharing Town Hall #3 (Video, Slide Deck, Transcript): Feedback from four NIH ICs (NICHD, NCI, NIMH, and NIBIB) NIDDK Data and Metadata Standards Examples for DMS Plans NICHD Data Standards Resources ImmPort Data Model NOT-OD-24-098 (Update to Hela Cell Whole Genome Sequence Data Submission and Access Under the NIH Lacks-Family Agreement) NOT-OD-22-214 (Supplemental Information to the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing: Responsible Management and Sharing of American Indian/Alaska Native Participant Data) NOT-OD-22-213 (Supplemental Information to the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing: Protecting Privacy When Sharing Human Research Participant Data) ]]> 21569 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/barnes-medical-school-st-louis/ Mon, 03 Jun 2024 13:25:11 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21529 When St. Louisans hear the name Barnes today, the century-old Barnes Hospital (now Barnes-Jewish Hospital) on Washington University’s medical campus might come to mind.  But, before Barnes Hospital came into existence in 1914, St. Louisans would have known Barnes to be the largest medical school in downtown St. Louis.  Color postcard of the Barnes Medical College building, circa 1910, VC060-i060007,Bernard Becker Medical Library Archives, Washington University in St. Louis. The long-since-defunct Barnes Medical College was considerably larger in both physical size and student enrollment than Washington University’s medical school.  Coincidentally, the university established its medical school in 1891, just one year before the Barnes Medical College opened in 1892.  Located at the intersection of Garrison Avenue and Chestnut Street in downtown St. Louis, Barnes Medical College operated as one of the largest medical schools in the United States between 1892 and 1918. Drawing of Robert A. Barnes, circa 1870, VC510-i01,Bernard Becker Medical Library Archives, Washington University in St. Louis. The present-day Barnes-Jewish Hospital and the former medical school were both named after the same person:  Robert A. Barnes.  Barnes was a wealthy St. Louis merchant and banker who left $250,000 of his estate for the construction of a new hospital for the city.  By no coincidence, Barnes Medical College was founded in the same year as his death in 1892.  The college administrators named their medical school after Barnes in hopes of securing the funding for the construction of a hospital to attach to their new classroom building.  This plan did not materialize. Composite portrait of Barnes Medical College class of 1899, VC142-i142004,Bernard Becker Medical Library Archives, Washington University in St. Louis. Despite the failed effort to acquire funds from the Barnes estate, Barnes Medical College flourished as one of the largest degree granting medical schools in the country by the end of the 1800s.  As you can see in the Class of 1899 composite photograph above, there were nearly 200 graduates in the medical school that year.  In addition to its large medical school, the institution also operated a dental college, a college of pharmacy, and a nurses’ training program.  At its peak, there were over 400 graduates per year across all programs offered.  However, the school became under financial duress in the early 1900s.  Barnes Medical College united with American Medical College in 1912 to become National University.  The St. Louis College of Physician and Surgeons also merged with this group in 1915.  The school collapsed despite these mergers, and the last medical students graduated in 1918. Interior view of the Barnes Dental College Infirmary, circa 1910, VC060-i060008,Bernard Becker Medical Library Archives, Washington University in St. Louis. Although Barnes Hospital and Washington University have been affiliated with each other for over 100 years, there was never at any point a similar relationship between the university and Barnes Medical College, nor was there ever a relationship between Barnes Hospital and Barnes Medical College either.  Nevertheless, even though it has been over a hundred years since the Barnes Medical College closed, the Barnes name being associated with both the hospital and the defunct medical school continues to be a source of confusion today.  Due to the thousands of medical degrees that were awarded to graduates of Barnes Medical College, decedents of those graduates often confuse the present-day hospital with the defunct medical school and/or with Washington University’s medical school. Color postcard of Barnes Hospital, circa 1915, VC027-i027049,Bernard Becker Medical Library Archives, Washington University in St. Louis. Looking back, it is safe to say the trustees of the Robert Barnes estate made a wise decision to pass on investing in the Barnes Medical College and instead grew the estate through extraordinarily successful investments in the 1890s and early 1900s.  These profitable speculations amounted to over one million dollars in the next 20 years, which enabled the construction of a state-of-the-art Barnes Hospital that opened in 1914.  This hospital, which has been consistently deemed one of the best in the United States for the past century, continues to operate under the name Barnes-Jewish Hospital today. ]]> 21529 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/may-2024-scholarly-communications-round-up/ Wed, 29 May 2024 18:04:24 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21525 Learn more about SciENcv and using ORCID to build the new NSF biographical sketch, the new Elsevier Transformative Agreement, and the revised Public Access Policy for the Gates Foundation. SciENcv, NSF and ORCID SciENcv has added the NSF Biographical Sketch and NSF Current and Pending Support templates required for NSF proposals submitted on or after May 20, 2024. For information please see NSF’s recently recorded webinar: Implementing the Common Forms for the Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending (Other) Support. (SciENcv info starts at 25:22) The NSF recommends researchers take advantage of ORCID when building their NSF Biographical Sketch. To learn more about using ORCID, register for the upcoming virtual Becker Library session held on June 20: ORCID: How to make it work for you. Elsevier Transformative Agreement Washington University Libraries and Bernard Becker Medical Library announce a new and transformative open access agreement with Elsevier, January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2027, that provides access to additional journal content, makes it free to read and share, and offers WashU authors open access publishing at no cost. The agreement grants access to more content from the Elsevier ScienceDirect journal collection, encompassing eight new Cell Press journals. Under the agreement, WashU corresponding authors are eligible for waivers and discounts on APCs for open access articles in journals from three journal bundle collections.  The journal bundles under the agreement are: Hybrid Journals, including Cell Press  Gold (Open Access) Journals   Gold (Open Access) Cell Press and Lancet Journals  For more information, see: Elsevier APC Waivers and Discounts for WashU Authors. Gates Foundation Revised Public Access Policy The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation updated their open access policy, 2025 Open Access Policy, to require grantees make their research publications available as preprints. The foundation will no longer pay for article processing charges. The revised policy takes effect January 1, 2025. Related reading: Will the Gates Foundation’s preprint-centric policy help open access? Nature News. April 4, 2024. Readings Chawla DS. Is ChatGPT corrupting peer review? Telltale words hint at AI use. Nature News. April 10, 2024. Chawla DS. Legal threats, online trolls and low pay: the world of scientific sleuth Elisabeth Bik. Chemistry World. May 16, 2024. Diep F. One Scientist Neglected His Grant Reports. Now U.S. Agencies Are Withholding Grants for an Entire University. The Chronicle of Higher Education. April 10, 2024. Else H. Should researchers use AI to write papers? Group aims for community-driven standards. Science. April 16, 2024. National Library of Medicine (NLM).MTIX: the Next-Generation Algorithm for Automated Indexing of MEDLINE. NLM Technical Bulletin. April 29, 2024. ]]> 21525 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/sts-cardiothoracic-surgery-ebook-now-available/ Fri, 17 May 2024 17:31:01 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21491 The STS Cardiothoracic Surgery e-book is now available on the uCentral mobile app and website.  The two volume e-book is published by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the texts are regularly updated to include the most up-to-date information. The two volumes are Pearson’s General Thoracic Surgery, an updated expansion of the Pearson’s Thoracic textbook for general thoracic surgery and Adult and Pediatric Cardiac Surgery. The e-books also contain a number of videos. Current users of the mobile app will automatically receive access to the new e-books with their next content update. ]]> 21491 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/sportdiscus-full-text-database/ Thu, 09 May 2024 12:56:12 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21439 &＃160; [Read more]]]> SPORTDiscus with Full text is the definitive database for sports and sports medicine research. Providing hundreds of full-text sports medicine journals, it is an essential tool for health professionals and researchers studying fitness, health and sports.    SPORTDiscus with Full Text includes 660 active indexed and abstracted journals. 481 of them are peer-reviewed. Subjects covered include orthopedics, physical therapy, sports injuries and rehabilitation, occupational health and safety, kinesiology and nutrition. ]]> 21439 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/memorable-conference-poster-part-1/ Wed, 08 May 2024 13:17:29 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21466 &＃160; [Read more]]]> Conference posters are the most abundant form of scientific communication and frequently the first incursion of scientists-in-training into dissemination — ahead of oral presentations or peer-reviewed papers. For researchers at any career stage, posters are an excellent opportunity to share work in progress, test new ideas, network, and sharpen a variety of communication skills — from graphic design to scientific writing to public speaking. In search of the best advice, practical examples, and templates to design, create, and present an outstanding poster? The Center for Health and Science Communication invites you to check out Scientific Writing and Communication and The Narrative Gym for Science Graduate Students and Postdocs from Becker Library and to watch our recent #SciComm Seminar Save Your Poster, Save the World, featuring Zen Faulkes, author of “Better Posters.” Here are some highlights from these resources. Know your audience? Yes, but most importantly — know the setting and understand the medium! Good news: the organizing committee has accepted your abstract, and you will get to boast your freshest data at the next scientific meeting! Chances are that most people in attendance will be knowledgeable about your topic or have at least enough background to follow. So, as you set about putting your poster together, reflect mainly on the environment where you will be presenting it: a noisy conference hall packed with fellow attendees who have many interesting posters to visit on a tight schedule. Some may still be jet lagged, while others may have difficulty hearing, reading small print, or telling certain colors apart. To stand out for all the right reasons, think of your poster not as a miniature paper but as a means to attract viewers and start a conversation about your research. Keep it professional. Among Zen Faulkes’ Ten Simple Rules for Conference Posters: be consistent with fonts, type sizes, and color schemes; distribute and align elements evenly; and avoid clutter. Posters are meant for visual impact. Consider the 20/40/40 ratio: 20% (or less!) text, 40% images, and 40% empty space. Instead of describing the methods in detail, include a diagram with your basic experimental approach. In lieu of a wordy discussion, a working model of the mechanism under study will go a long way toward illustrating your hypothesis, main findings, conclusions, and open questions. Use text strategically. The title is crucial: it will be the first, and maybe the only, information that your peers see about your work. Spend some time designing a clear, concise, and informative title. Use 90-point boldface font so the title may be read from at least 6 feet away; do not go below 28 points for any other text. Location, location, location! Second only to the title, the most desirable real estate on a poster is the upper middle section: consider making it the focal point featuring the key takeaways of your study. References and acknowledgments are usually banished to the bottom right and written in a tiny font — use this area instead for QR codes linking to the complete bibliography, your lab, or your scholarly profile. Keep an eye out for Part 2 of this series for tools and tips to help you navigate the unique challenges of presenting your poster! ]]> 21466 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/dataset-catalog-beta/ Mon, 06 May 2024 13:16:03 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21450 &＃160; [Read more]]]> Earlier this year, the National Library of Medicine (NLM) announced the launch of the beta version of a new online tool called the Dataset Catalog. This tool is intended to be the “PubMed of datasets” to help users search, find and retrieve datasets in multiple repositories through a single, user-friendly interface. Dataset Catalog beta currently indexes datasets from dbGaP, Dryad, ImmPort, and Harvard Dataverse, and more than 20 additional repositories are on the list for inclusion in the future.   Like PubMed, Dataset Catalog beta supports using Boolean operators AND, OR, NOT and parenthesis () when searching. For example, performing a search with “p53” or with “TP53” returns 24 or 41 results, respectively. Instead, searching with “p53 OR TP53” returns 63 results. While the functionality of the beta version is limited, the results can be ordered by relevance or date. The results can also be filtered by repositories, time frame (in decades), and MeSH terms. The default setting will display the top five MeSH terms. Dataset records can be accessed by clicking on the dataset title in the search results. A dataset record includes a general description of the dataset, the URL where the dataset is located, the issued date, related MeSH terms, keywords, the repository where the dataset is located and the contributors of the dataset. On the right-hand side of the dataset record, there is an “Access Information” box providing dataset licensing and rights information. This box also includes a link to the dataset, which is the same link that is included in the main part of the dataset record. The beta period will extend through August of 2024. After the beta period has ended, the tool will come down and the project will be evaluated by NLM leadership. If the evaluation goes well, NLM plans to launch the official version of Dataset Catalog in early 2025. NLM is keen to receive feedback from researchers during the beta period. On the right-hand side of any page there is a blue “Give Feedback” button which will expose a pop out box that will accept user feedback submissions. This functionality works well when using Google Chrome but may not work on some versions of Firefox. Feel free to share your thoughts about Dataset Catalog beta with NLM. If you are interested in learning more about Dataset Catalog beta, check out this recorded NLM webinar presented by the Dataset Catalog beta team. ]]> 21450 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/new-biostatistics-guide/ Fri, 03 May 2024 13:54:36 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21415 &＃160; [Read more]]]> Check out the new Biostatistics Guide on the Bernard Becker Medical Library website, created in collaboration with the Center for Biostatistics and Data Science (CBDS) within the Institute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics. It provides resources and references for frequently asked questions related to biostatistical analyses for research projects. The Biostatistics Consulting Service within the CBDS hopes that this curated collection of biostatistics resources will empower researchers on campus who are interested in developing and/or extending their statistical knowledge and computing skills with self-directed online learning resources. The current release provides a comprehensive guide for power analysis and sample size, that includes a variety of resources under the following headings; Introductory Reference Materials, Fundamentals, How-To Guides and Examples, Tools to Select the Right Statistical Test and Effect Size Measurement, Validated Calculators (Free Online Tools), Downloadable Software (Free and For Purchase) and more. Work to create additional guides for a variety of biostatistics topics is ongoing. The new Biostatistics Guide will be updated regularly with more resources added over time.  Your feedback is very important to help us provide a useful guide. If you have questions and feedback about the Biostatistics Guide or ideas for potential biostatistics topics that could be added to this new guide, please reach out to [email protected]. ]]> 21415 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/announcing-a-new-and-transformative-4-year-open-access-deal-with-elsevier/ Thu, 02 May 2024 13:11:59 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21421 Washington University Libraries and Bernard Becker Medical Library announce a new and transformative open access agreement with Elsevier, spanning from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2027, that provides access to additional journal content, makes it free to read and share, and offers WashU authors open access publishing at no cost. The agreement broadens publishing opportunities for WashU authors across all disciplines, supports authors who wish to publish open access articles, and fosters open science and scholarship by expanding access to WashU research findings without barriers in fulfillment of the WashU Open Access Resolution.  Specifically, this four-year read-and-publish agreement grants access to more content from the Elsevier ScienceDirect journal collection, encompassing eight new Cell Press journals. Under the agreement, WashU corresponding authors are eligible for waivers and discounts on APCs for open access articles in journals from three journal bundle collections.   The journal bundles under the agreement are:   Hybrid Journals, including Cell Press   Gold (Open Access) Journals    Gold (Open Access) Cell Press and Lancet Journals   Hybrid journals publish articles under the traditional publication model but allow authors to publish them under an Open Access license with the payment of an APC. WashU corresponding authors are entitled to a full waiver of APCs for the Hybrid Journals, including Cell Press, each subject to a limit of waivers per calendar year, with a gradual increase each year of the agreement. The waiver limits are based on WashU publishing history in the journals and are subject to a first-come, first-served basis. A unique component to WashU’s agreement is a clause allowing WashU corresponding authors to a full APC waiver for any Hybrid Journal that “flips” to Gold (Open Access) during the agreement term.   Gold (Open Access) journals publish all articles under an Open Access license with authors paying an APC. WashU corresponding authors who publish articles from the Gold (Open Access) Journal bundle will be entitled to 25% APC discount for the first two years of the agreement, 20% in 2026, and 15% in 2027. In addition, WashU corresponding authors who publish in the Gold (Open Access) Cell Press and Lancet Journal bundle will be entitled to a 10% APC discount for the term of the agreement. WashU authors can select from one of two Creative Commons licenses: CC BY or CC BY-NC-ND.  Additional Resources  A full list of eligible Elsevier journals under the agreement is available in the Journal Finder tool for WashU. Use the guides below for more detailed information specific for WashU authors who want to publish in Elsevier journals:  Becker Medical Library: Article Processing Charges (APCs): Waivers and Discounts for WashU Authors University Libraries: APC Waivers and Discounts for Elsevier Journals Contact Information:   University Libraries: Micah Zeller   Becker Medical Library: Cathy Sarli       ]]> 21421 https://becker.wustl.edu/news/medical-students-visit-the-netherlands/ Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:29:29 +0000 https://becker.wustl.edu/?p=21375 &＃160; [Read more]]]> Last month, the Center for the History of Medicine at Becker Library once again sponsored a spring break trip to Europe for Phase I medical students. While last year’s trip went to northern Italy to explore the origins of dissection in European medicine, this year focused on the medical legacy of the Dutch Golden Age by visiting key sites in the cities of Leiden and Amsterdam. The Italian universities of Bologna and Padua were arguably the most significant sites of medical research in the 16th century, but the 17th century saw the emergence of northern Europe as a hotbed of study. One of the most popular places for young men to pursue their medical degree was the University of Leiden, founded in 1575 and the oldest university in the Netherlands. Many of the most well-loved atlases in Becker’s rare book collections are the works of former Leiden professors and students, including those of Bernard Albinus and Govard Bidloo, which make regular appearances at our annual display of rare anatomical texts. Leiden’s legacy as a center of medicine can still be seen today. During their time there, students visited the Hortus Botanicus—the Netherlands’s oldest botanical garden, originally founded as a medicinal herb garden for the medical faculty—and the Rijiksmuseum Boerhaave, one of Europe’s finest scientific museums and home to both an outstanding collection of historic medical artifacts and a reproduction of the original Leiden anatomical theatre. They also paid a visit to the Bibliotheca Thysiana, a 17th century library still housed in its original environment. While the Thysiana’s founder, Johannes Thysius, was a lawyer by trade, his collection includes books from a wide variety of disciplines including botany and medicine, showing how early modern intellectualism was not as sharply divided between the humanities and the sciences as it is today. Instead, physicians were expected to be knowledgeable in all of the liberal arts, including philosophy and astronomy. Both the University of Leiden and the University of Amsterdam maintain anatomical collections whose origins reach back to the 18th century. Visiting these was not only a remarkable opportunity to see specimens originally prepared by famous anatomists such as Frederick Ruysch and Siegfried Albinus; it also provided a window into medical ethics. The vast majority of the anatomical and pathological specimens on display were taken before there was any real consideration of patient consent, and some of them were also acquired through colonial rule. Their presence in museums raises numerous questions—should they be displayed at all? If so, how should they be contextualized? Should medical museums be open to the public at all, or limited to visits by medical professionals? As one student put, “After hearing from the guides at the medical schools in the Netherlands, it is clear that other societies are also grappling with questions about the history of their medical institutions. It was valuable to hear how this type of complex and sensitive question about medicine’s history is being broached outside of the U.S.” And, of course, the importance of art should not be forgotten. Early modern anatomical texts are known for being extremely artistic in comparison to their modern counterparts, and the Dutch atlases are no exception. Our visit would not be complete without a visit to the Mauritshuis Art Museum to take in the masterpieces of the Dutch Golden Age. While the museum’s most famous piece is probably Vermeer’s Girl With a Pearl Earring, we of course had to visit Rembrandt’s The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, one of the world’s most famous depictions of dissection in the early modern period. We are deeply grateful to the generosity of Dr. Bernard Becker for the gift that made this trip possible. We are also hopeful that we will be able to incorporate this trip into an elective for Phase 3 medical students, thereby giving more students the opportunity to interact with medicine’s rich past. ]]> 21375