This report by the British Library and the Research Information Network (RIN) provides a unique insight into how information is used by researchers across life sciences. Undertaken by the University of Edinburgh’s Institute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, and the UK Digital Curation Centre and the University of Edinburgh’s Information Services, the report concludes that ‘one-size-fits-all’ information and data sharing policies are not achieving scientifically productive and cost-efficient information use in life sciences. The report was developed using an innovative approach to capture the day-to-day patterns of information use in seven research teams from a wide range of disciplines, from botany to clinical neuroscience. The study undertaken over 11 months and involving 56 participants found that there is a significant gap between how researchers behave and the policies and strategies of funders and service providers. This suggests that the attempts to implement such strategies have had only a limited impact. Key findings from the report include: * Researchers use informal and trusted sources of advice from colleagues, rather than institutional service teams, to help identify information sources and resources * The use of social networking tools for scientific research purposes is far more limited than expected * Data and information sharing activities are mainly driven by needs and benefits perceived as most important by life scientists rather than ‘top-down’ policies and strategies * There are marked differences in the patterns of information use and exchange between research groups active in different areas of the life sciences, reinforcing the need to avoid standardised policy approaches

• Does the manuscript apply under the NIH Public Access Policy? • Which NIH grant awards supported the manuscript? Use the NIH Grants Lookup Tool to confirm grant award numbers. • Which journal will the manuscript be submitted to? • Which method of submission does the journal fall under? See the NIH chart on submission methods. • If a Method C or D form of submission journal, which author will be assigned as the responsible author for the review and approval tasks? See the short video: Approving Submission of an Article to PubMed Central which outlines the process for authors in response to an email from NIHMS asking for approval of a submission done by a publisher or third party. • Which author will be responsible for making sure that the work has a PMCID within three months post publication of the manuscript, and notifying all authors and PIs associated with the manuscript of the most current means of documentation of compliance with the NIH Policy (“PMC Journal – In Process,” or NIHMS ID) until the PMCID is assigned?

Dutch national website providing information for academics about the advantages of OA to publicly financed research

Mission: • To inspire new activities and facilitate knowledge exchange between Nordic/Baltic • stakeholder, and to increase the international visibility of Nordic and Baltic policies and initiatives • To stress the importance of Open Access in the Nordic and Baltic countries and to describe both theoretical and best-practice models for financing, rights management and other fundamental issues. • To disseminate to both a Nordic/Baltic and an international readership information about successful initiatives and other activities in the Nordic and Baltic countries.

Hear Walter H. Curioso, M.D., M.P.H. talk about his views of open access and how it can help in developing countries.

Fitzgerald, Anne M. and Hooper, Neale (2009) A review of the literature on the legal aspects of open access policy, practices and licensing in Australia and selected jurisdictions. [Review]

The Open Archives Forum provided a Europe-based focus for dissemination of information about European activity related to open archives and, in particular, to the Open Archives Initiative. The aim of the Forum was to facilitate clustering of IST projects, national initiatives and other parties interested in the open archives approach. In order to do so, the Forum brought interested parties together to build a community of interest, enable exchange of information and establish a web-based European information source for open archives. In addition, the Forum undertook comparative reviews of technical and organisational issues.