One of the challenges that we are trying to address in the internet era is tracking the conversation around a specific paper. Yesterday, I talked about trackbacks as a means to capture conversation around a specific paper. Postgenomic aggregates a lot of the discussion on the web (from news sources, the blogosphere and papers), while Scintilla provides a killer recommendation engine and groups.
As a graduate student, and in various jobs I have been in, journal clubs have been one of the more enjoyable ways of discussing science. PLoS One has set up journal clubs around papers published there, a feature enabled by some of the functionality in the Topaz platform. At the time the journal clubs were announced, I wrote a post suggesting some options. It looks like some graduate students, frustrated with publishing and the lack of openness in science have set up a website called JournalFire. In a blog post announcing the site, the authors write
Until recently, large media publishers controlled what we read, listened to, and watched. Now blogs, podcasts, and Youtube have put the users in control. Unfortunately science has lagged behind. Publishers still act as the primary filter of scientific information, with some top-tier journals rejecting up to 83% of submitted papers even before they are sent to peer review. Combine this with the fact that grants and faculty positions often hinge on the number of publications one has in these top journals, and the result is that a handful of people have tremendous impact on the global scientific agenda. Journalfire exists to put scientists back in control of science.
JournalFire provides a centralized location for you to share, discuss, and evaluate published journal articles. You, the scientists, are put in charge of determining what studies are significant and noteworthy.
The post goes on to say that you can create journal clubs around a particular topic and starts of with links to every paper in Pubmed. The language suggests there could be a Digg-line voting system as well. This is not the first such effort. There is BioWizard and one more site which I don’t remember. JournalFire is currently in private beta, but from the language at least, I am optimistic about the service. Having done something similar recently, I definitely root for those willing to try and develop a service, especially if there is a need. I like Digg as a concept, but the quality of the Digg audience leaves much to be desired and I won’t say much about science there. So if someone call pull of a community driven site around scientific tops, all power to them.
If anyone knows anything else about the site (for example has tried it out), and can share it, please let me know
.
Further reading
Attila on the role of the journal club in lab life
Bora on Journal Clubs
Update From the comments it seems that right now only .edu, ac.uk, hhmi.org, nih.gov, or embl.de are accepted. I missed that part. As Chris Surridge says, that is a shame. Since the site is still only in private beta, perhaps that is a means of keeping things under control. In the long run, with a lot of people prefering to use other email addresses and people like yours truly being interested, opening up things would be a great idea.
Technorati Tags: JournalFire, Journal Clubs, Science
9 Comments
Interesting site. Thank you for sharing the discovery. Have you seen my latest post on Journal Clubs? I’d like to see your opinion.
Bora
I actually meant to link to your latest post, but forgot. Let me add it to the further reading list.
I just commented on your site.
Bora
I actually meant to link to your latest post, but forgot. Let me add it to the further reading list.
I just commented on your site.
Could be a nice site but it seems a shame that I for one won’t be able to benefit from the discussions. Users are restricted to those with email addresses from the following domains: .edu, ac.uk, hhmi.org, nih.gov, or embl.de . I can see the logic of trying to cater specifically to the academic scientific community, as this might cut down on the effort needed to moderate the site. Even in this the list is very anglocentric, excluding such powerhouses of research as the Pasteur and Weizmann Institutes, and the whole of Australia. It would be good however if those of us outside the ivory towers could at least read the discussions even if barred from joining in. ‘Scientist’ isn’t a job title, it’s a state of mind.
Could be a nice site but it seems a shame that I for one won't be able to benefit from the discussions. Users are restricted to those with email addresses from the following domains: .edu, ac.uk, hhmi.org, nih.gov, or embl.de . I can see the logic of trying to cater specifically to the academic scientific community, as this might cut down on the effort needed to moderate the site. Even in this the list is very anglocentric, excluding such powerhouses of research as the Pasteur and Weizmann Institutes, and the whole of Australia. It would be good however if those of us outside the ivory towers could at least read the discussions even if barred from joining in. 'Scientist' isn't a job title, it's a state of mind.
The first time I checked the site it only allowed .edu email addresses. I sent an email asking for an account saying that I was in EMBL (embl.de) so I think that they are adding upon request. They also changed the login for invitation only so even if the domain is now accepted I can’t create an account
.
The first time I checked the site it only allowed .edu email addresses. I sent an email asking for an account saying that I was in EMBL (embl.de) so I think that they are adding upon request. They also changed the login for invitation only so even if the domain is now accepted I can't create an account
.
I’m one of the creators of Journalfire. Thanks for taking an interest in our site. We are still in the early stages of beta testing. As Pedro noted we are adding email domains as they are requested, though currently we would like to keep them restricted to academic institutions or other trusted domains. The discussions themselves will be made open to the public in near future.
If you’ve already requested an invitation, we haven’t forgotten you, and will be sending instructions soon. We’re looking forward to your feedback!
I'm one of the creators of Journalfire. Thanks for taking an interest in our site. We are still in the early stages of beta testing. As Pedro noted we are adding email domains as they are requested, though currently we would like to keep them restricted to academic institutions or other trusted domains. The discussions themselves will be made open to the public in near future.
If you've already requested an invitation, we haven't forgotten you, and will be sending instructions soon. We're looking forward to your feedback!
One Trackback
[...] Posted by nsaunders on October 12th, 2007 I was alerted to JournalFire via Deepak and Pedro and signed up for a trial. It’s early days – they are beta-testing just now, but I think the site shows some promise. In particular, I like their mission statement: Journalfire exists to put scientists back in control of science. [...]