FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2406357701> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2406357701 abstract "Medscape founded Medscape General Medicine (http://www.medgenmed.com) on April 9, 1999 as an experiment to test whether an exclusively electronic, primary-source, peer-reviewed general medical journal could attract enough authors and readers to survive and contribute in an already crowded medical information field.[1] It was also founded for the strategic purpose of being a recognizable anchor for physicians in the brand new world of the Internet, to help them feel at home in the familiar and friendly confines of an actual journal while feeling their way around this uncertain and potentially intimidating new medium.Most medical research articles published in the United States, and many articles published in other developed countries, result from research funded by the government, often the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). We believe (and one of us [GDL] has argued for many years) that it is inappropriate for a reader in such a developed country whose tax money has paid for the research to have to pay again to read the results of such research by having to buy a subscription to the journal that publishes them. For government-funded research to be unavailable for application in the field of public health because of financial constraints seems particularly at odds with the intent of the US Congress in funding the NIH. This idea, open-access publishing, was expressed in a speech at a conference at Harvard on the Internet and Public Health in 2000, and was supported editorially by The Boston Globe.[2]The notion of open-access electronic publishing, already established in physics and mathematics, was alien to medicine and most biological sciences when MedGenMed was founded in April 1999, although it was proposed in a comprehensive and highly controversial form only 1 month later as E-biomed by Harold Varmus, PhD, at the NIH in May 1999.[3] Considered a radical idea then by many, especially commercial and association publishers, open-access publishing in biomedicine has now become a very live issue, technically, economically, and politically.[4,5]Five years after MedGenMed was begun, our experiment can be pronounced a success. From a strategic standpoint, the need to provide a familiar signpost on the Internet is long past, with more than 95% of US physicians using the Internet, many on a daily basis. Most medical and biological science journals now have Web versions in addition to their paper ones, sometimes exact replicas, sometimes variations in content, form, and timing. MedGenMed has published more than 1100 articles in 5 years, all free of charge to the reader and the author, with a median turnaround time from receipt to publication of about 42 days, including all necessary cycles of peer review and revision. The number of readers is steadily increasing, as are the number and quality of manuscripts received.What has MedGenMed truly pioneered?We have been the first to:Exist as a primary source, exclusively electronic, peer-reviewed general medical journal;[1]Create and publish an ethical advertising policy;[6]Publish a detailed description of the ethics of the medical Internet;[7]Be included in MEDLINE as an exclusively electronic journal of its type;[8]Comprise a world-class international editorial board for an eJournal;[9]Publish an audio-only speech-editorial;[10]Create, announce, and continue to deliver truly rapid electronic publication, without sacrificing quality;[11]Provide full-text publication concurrently with a US federal government hearing and press conference;[12] andIncorporate eSections, each with its own editor, patterned after, but more efficient for readers, than the families of individual specialist journals owned by many publishers.[13]And we are just getting started.We will continue to use the medium of the Internet in new ways to fulfill our mission of delivering timely, peer-reviewed information to a growing US and international audience. In the near term, we plan to introduce an integrated continuing medical education component for key articles, something one of us (GDL) pioneered in print in 1995.We see opportunities for important collaborations that allow us to utilize our expertise in Internet publishing and our substantial online reach to support the mission of professional societies to disseminate important clinical information to a broad range of health professionals.We have barely begun to exploit the ability of the Internet to interact with our readers to understand the value they place on various kinds of professional information and to allow them some meaningful participation in shaping our content. And as electronic information finally becomes readily available at the point of care, we must find better ways to integrate primary-source, peer-reviewed original content with highly summarized secondary-source material so that the process of intellectual exploration is enhanced and not discouraged by the advances in information technology now available to us.There remain questions about sustainability and stature of an enterprise like MedGenMed. What is the model for financial viability? Medscape, Medicalogic, and WebMD, all for-profit companies, have sequentially generously supported MedGenMed from other funding sources. When will even savvy readers/authors more fully realize that the Internet is a medium, like paper is a medium, and recognize that content should be judged based on its merit, not on the medium in which it appears? How quickly will the academic personnel committees in the great universities accept a MedGenMed publication as holding the same weight for appointment and promotion as that in a comparable, but primarily paper, journal? When will the researchers learn how to look for and give credence to articles electronically and reference articles in the purely electronic journals with the same dedication that they do for traditional paper publications, so as to drive the Science Citation Index scores, for better or for worse, comparably?Other notable products in this field of open-access, full-text resources that are free of charge to the reader include the successor to E-biomed, PubMed Central at the National Library of Medicine, begun in February 2000, and now containing some 80 journals;[14] FreeMedicalJournals.com, containing some 1300 full-text journals, a few immediately upon publication and many after a delay;[15] the Directory of Open Access Journals, a product of the Libraries at Lund University in Sweden, listing 736 journals;[16] Medscape's Publishers' Circle, which provides selections from about 120 journals;[17] BioMed Central, which publishes more than 100 open-access journals covering many aspects of biology and medicine;[18] and Harold Varmus, who has returned, with support form the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, to launch the Public Library of Biology and Public Library of Medicine in 2003 and 2004, primarily electronic and free, but with paper versions sold for money.[19] It is possible that Stevan Harnad of the United Kingdom, beginning with a presentation to the International Congress of Peer Review on Biomedical Publication in Prague in 1997, has done more to move this field forward than anyone else by his dogged determination that the biomedical literature should be free of charge, virtually instantaneous, and that authors should “self-archive” their own work.[20] He has stirred the pot relentlessly but has recently seemed to acknowledge that the peer-review process may add value and that, even with self-archiving, there are real costs that someone has to pay for.The ultimate answer(s) are not known. But the changes in the creation, packaging, and delivery of medical information brought about by the use of new technologies will only continue. And, when this information is properly used, authors, readers, the academic enterprise, and the public's health are the ultimate beneficiaries." @default.
• W2406357701 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2406357701 creator A5019847907 @default.
• W2406357701 creator A5027762688 @default.
• W2406357701 creator A5029250459 @default.
• W2406357701 creator A5080092220 @default.
• W2406357701 date "2004-01-01" @default.
• W2406357701 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W2406357701 title "Happy Birthday to Open-Access Publishing Pioneer MedGenMed: 5 Years Old and Counting" @default.
• W2406357701 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/1395788" @default.
• W2406357701 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W2406357701 type Work @default.
• W2406357701 sameAs 2406357701 @default.
• W2406357701 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2406357701 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2406357701 hasAuthorship W2406357701A5019847907 @default.
• W2406357701 hasAuthorship W2406357701A5027762688 @default.
• W2406357701 hasAuthorship W2406357701A5029250459 @default.
• W2406357701 hasAuthorship W2406357701A5080092220 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C151719136 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C151719136 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C15744967 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C161191863 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C17744445 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C199539241 @default.
• W2406357701 hasConceptScore W2406357701C41008148 @default.
• W2406357701 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2406357701 hasLocation W24063577011 @default.
• W2406357701 hasOpenAccess W2406357701 @default.
• W2406357701 hasPrimaryLocation W24063577011 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W1529747033 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W1533613103 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W1880311005 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W1914058107 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W1968470060 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2007315682 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2007512664 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2066859937 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2070642231 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2093703754 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2095220994 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2135900516 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2164653469 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2258545458 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2279047384 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2315799108 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W2411725579 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W3017572942 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W51054897 @default.
• W2406357701 hasRelatedWork W177033460 @default.
• W2406357701 hasVolume "6" @default.
• W2406357701 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2406357701 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2406357701 magId "2406357701" @default.
• W2406357701 workType "article" @default.