The role of editors in the development of the CoBRA guideline and the power of the multidisciplinary approach. Paola De Castro, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome (Italy), European Association of Science Editors The presentation will show how the importance of collaboration between scientists and editors is crucial to maximize the benefits of research. The role of editors as gatekeepers of science will be pointed out as well as the importance to communicate and disseminate science to different stakeholders - outside the specialty sector where it originates from - following a multidisciplinary approach. For example, policy makers, research funders, general public, patients, they all, for different reasons, need to be informed about progress of research in a way that they can really understand it and become aware of benefits they get from that. Within this framework, the different steps which lead to the development of the CoBRA guideline to standardize Citations of Bioresources in Research Articles will be outlined with special reference to the support provided by the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), an international community of individuals and associations from diverse backgrounds, linguistic traditions and professional experience in science communication and editing engaged to provide Excellence and Accountability in Science Editing.

1. The role of editors
in the development of the CoBRA guideline
and the power of the multidisciplinary approach
Paola De Castro
European Association od Science Editors (EASE)
Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Italy)
Workshop EDITORS AS PROMOTERS OF GOOD PRACTICES IN BIORESOURCE RESEARCH
Toulouse, October 9, 2015

2. Challenges of scientific publishing: editors as agents of change
Open access, Open data, Open science, Quality, Transparency, Integrity
FOCUS OF THE PRESENTATION
Editors and researchers working together
BRIF initiative (Bioresource Research Impact Factor) and the editors’ subgroup
Benefits of a multidisciplinary approach
Results achieved and future steps
1
2
3
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
2

3. CHALLENGES OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING
Open access, Open data, Open Science,
Quality, Transparency, Integrity, Metrics
1

4. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
E-Research, E-science – Scientific conversation
Global collaboration – Next generation infrastructure
 scientific journals are changing shape (and roles)
 readers are becoming more and more demanding
 authors are more and more pressured by evaluation and metrics
 not only scientists are interested in the research conversation
DEFINE THE CONTEXT
4

5. Publication arena
KEY PLAYERS – stakeholders
• Authors
• Editors
• Publishers
• Readers
• Policy Makers
• Funders
• Industry
• Webmasters
• Librarians
• Data curators
• Aggregators
Where does responsibility lie?
• Patients
• Citizens
Create awareness
Public health
Global health
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
5

6. Includes free news and reviews on the
lack of scrutiny at open-access journals,
the rarity of published negative studies,
and publishing sensitive data.
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research. Toulouse,
October 9, 2015 6
COMMUNICATION
IN SCIENCE
pressures and predators
Science, Special issue. 4 October 2013
http://www.sciencemag.org/site/special/scicomm/index.xhtml
Yes, but…
“ “

7. Publication/Dissemination  Online availability, Use, Impact, Evaluation, Metrics,
Social networks, Awareness, Preservation, Data curation
Current debate on scientific publishing
KEY WORDS
• REWARD EQUATOR CONFERENCE ON WASTE IN RESEARCH, Edinburgh, 28-30 2015
Scientific (e)Content & Conduct Quality, Reliability, Originality, Duplicability
Editorial Process Ethical issues: Authorship, Editorship, Transparency, Integrity, Equity,
Gender issues, Privacy, Conflicts of interest, Copyright, Licences
Editorial Process Technical issues: Structure, Standards, Formats, Guidelines, Style
Hints from
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
Responsibility, awareness, transparency, guidelines, accountability, evidence, open data
7
scientific research

8. Debate on Open Research Data
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
• How can we define research data?
• What types of research data should be open?
• When and how does openness need to be limited?
• How should the issue of data re-use be addressed?
• Where should research data be stored and made accessible?
• How can we enhance data awareness and a culture of sharing?
Questions raised during the EC Consultation on Open research data,
Bruxelles, July 2, 2013
Research data are associated with research activity in the process
of creating knowledge on the basis of existing knowledge
8
The BRIF position was repres

9. • researchers ask the wrong
questions
• study designs are inadequate
or inappropriate for the question
under study,
• studies are not reported
appropriately,
or are either not published or
published in the wrong place.
• Publish or perish - Predatory
journals,
• Misconduct, metrics
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
9
Does it apply to
bioresource
research?
How can journal editors
collaborate
with researchers towards a
solution?
85% OF RESEARCH IS WASTE
 focus on research question,
methods, reporting,
reproducibility, evaluation,
incentives and more
WHY?
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

10. EDITORS AS AGENTS OF CHANGE
In 2005, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
(ICMJE) initiated a policy requiring investigators to deposit information
about trial design into an accepted clinical trials registry before the onset
of patient enrolment…
Included requirement for registration in the Uniform Requirements
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
10
Scientists require evidence
The story of clinical trials
Before that, trials registration was the exception; now it is the rule.

11. Numbers of registered clinical trials on the International
Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and numbers of
publications about clinical trials on PubMed (1998 – 2013)
Roderik F Viergever, and Keyang Li BMJ Open 2015;5:e008932

12. Registration
facilitates the dissemination of information
among clinicians, researchers, and patients,
helps to assure trial participants that the information
that accrues as a result of their altruism will become part
of the public record.
contributes to increase public trust in medical
science.
Laine C et al. Clinical Trial Registration — Looking Back and Moving Ahead. N Engl J Med
2007; 356:2734-2736June 28, 2007
Effects of standard approach in the registration of
clinical trials
Will the CoBRA have a
similar effect?

13. Bioresources are drivers of
innovation and scientific progress
and their sharing is a priority for
biomedical research;
yet,
the limited acknowledgement of
the efforts required to establish,
maintain and share them is an
obstacle for impact evaluation,
often leading to waste.
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of
good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
13
REWARD Conference
Edinburgh, 28-30 September 2015

14. USEFUL SOURCES FOR EDITORIAL ISSUES
and hints on the current debate
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
Portal of
reporting
guidelines
Committee
Publication
Ethics
Editors
Associations
Top Journal
websites
Open Access / Open data14

15. EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF
SCIENCE EDITORS
Mission: To improve the global standard and quality of science
editing by promoting the value of science editors and
supporting
- professional development
- research and
- collaboration.
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
15
an international community of individuals
and associations from diverse backgrounds,
linguistic traditions and professional experience
in science communication and editing

16. EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF SCIENCE EDITORS
• Improving global standards
• Raising the profile of science editors
• Supporting professional development
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
16
Excellence and Accountability in Science Editing
http://www.ease.org.uk/

17. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
Editors and researchers
working together
The BRIF initiative
(Bioresource Research Impact Factor) and
the editors’ subgroup
2
17

18. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
• biological samples with associated
data (medical/epidemiological, social)
• databases independent of physical
samples
• other biomolecular and bioinformatics
research tools
It is a work in progress, started in 2010,
currently developing a framework for
• creating a tool for calculating research
impact of bioresources based on a metric
(algorithm) and on the use of a unique
digital resource identifier
• assessing requirements for
citation/acknowledgement of bioresources
in order to trace their use in research
BIORESOURCES are
The BRIF initiative
18
Facilitate acknowledgement
Evaluate use and impact

19. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
The neglected role of research biobanks
In scientific publications biobanks are
• Not cited at all
• Cited in a heterogeneous way
• Not cited in a standardized way
• Difficult to retrieve
What is needed • Sensitize journal editors to BRIF issues
• Standardize citations in journal articles
• Modify editorial guidelines
• Inform the scientific community about the relevance of
this issue
19
Difficult to evaluate

20. BRIF PARTICIPANTS
jul/10 - apr/12: 135 members, 21 countries, >95 institutions
Legend:
<5 5≤ >10 10≤ >20 20≤ >30

21. Competences/parties
represented in BRIF
• Biobank partners
• Computational biologists
• Computer scientists
• Genome/genetics scientists
• Epidemiologists
• Jurists, lawyers
• Ethicists
• Experts in impact factors
• Bibliometricists
• Journal Editors
• Researchers/users
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
21
A multidisciplinary approach is required
Different subgroups were established

22. The journal editors’ subgroup
Necessity for journal editors to recognise the need to properly
acknowledge and cite the bioresources used,
using proper terminology and/or identifiers,
and agreeing on standards of citation
(format/marker paper, location(s), institutions, people, etc.)
Initial points to address
• Actions to raise awareness of journal editors to BRIF issues
and modify their editorial guidelines accordingly
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
22

23. JOURNAL EDITORS PILOT STUDY (2012)
• Select journals publishing biobank related research (starting from journals where you
most publish
• Check the Instructions to authors of selected journals to see if and how they mention
biobanks.
• Check journal articles to see if and how they mention biobanks.
• Contact editors explaining why it is important to cite biobanks and ask them to consider
their inclusion in the acknowledgements,
• Suggest editors how to modify instructions to authors.
• Publicize results obtained in the pilot (number of the journals addressed, no. of journals
changing their instructions to authors, etc ) through articles published in the relevant
journals and new contacts with the professional associations and editors groups such as
the EASE, ICMJE, Equator, COPE, etc.
Tolouse, 22 October 2012
Collect background information to progress on the BRIF
initiative

24. • Belgrade International Open Access Conference 2012. May 17-19, 2012; Belgrade.
• 11th EASE Conference, “Editing in the Digital World”, Tallinn, Estonia 8-10 June 2012
• Brocher Workshop Exploring Innovative Mechanisms to Build Trust in Human Health Research
Biobanking. June 12-13, 2013; Geneva. 2013.
• 7th International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication
Chicago, September 8-10, 2013
• EAHIL Conference , Rome, 11-13 June 2014,
• HOBB, Milan 29-31July 2015
• REWARD, Waste in Research Conference, Edinburgh, 2015
ACTIONS developed by the BRIF
Journal Editors’ subgroup
• Address the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
• Address the European Association of Science Editors (EASE)
• Address the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
• Survey to Journal editors (awareness and availability to collaborate)
• Organize a restricted workshop addressed to Journal editors and experts
(Rome, June 21, 2013)
• Publish the CoBRA guideline (BMC Medicine,2015)
• Addressing Equator , Workshop in Toulouse, 2015, …. ….. ….
Sensitizing about BRIF issues
Dissemination of BRIF issues in international Conferences

25. BENEFITS OF A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
Results achieved and future steps3
We addressed different targets in our dissemination and awareness raising c
and translated research results in lay languages

26. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of
good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
RESULTS ACHIEVED
Awareness on BRIF
26
1

27. AWARENESS:
BRIF IN A BOOKSHELF
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as
promoters of good practices in bioresource
research. Toulouse, October 9, 2015
27

28. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of
good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
28
RESULTS ACHIEVED
Inclusion in the Instructions
for Authors; Annali ISS
2
The insertion has been added in the section
“Manuscript presentation”

29. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of
good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
29
RESULTS ACHIEVED
Inclusion of Bioresources
in EASE Guidelines
3
available in 20 languages
(www.ease.org.uk/publications/author-guidelines)
The insertion has been added in the section
‘Methods’

30. BRIF Meeting – Rome, June 21st 2013
Standardizing Bioresource Citation In Journal Articles: The Editors Point Of View
• Standard citation format
(based on existing solutions)
• Position on Open data
RESULTS ACHIEVED
4
Objective of the workshop
Outcome: General agreement on
To elaborate practical and realistic proposals for
harmonizing bioresources citation in journal articles
with the help of journal editors.
Eurosurveillance Editorial Board Meeting. Vilnius, October 11, 2013 -- P. De Castro

31. 31
RESULTS ACHIEVED
Survey to journal editors (2013)
5
The results were partly presented at the Chicago Conference on
Peer review and biomedical publications (September 2013)
The majority of the journals (ISI) in the sample (both OA and non OA) is
• aware on the issue of bioresources
• is uncertain whether to include citation to bioresources in instructions to authors
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015

32. Position of the BRIF Editorial Subgroup on Open data
agreed upon during the Rome workshop and presented at EC consultation of July2, 2013
It is important to create awareness and trust on the use of open bioresources.
The EC should create mechanisms and incentives that facilitate the culture of sharing through ad hoc
recommendations and the inclusion of specific clauses on open research data in their funding schemes. Technical
issues about quality, maintenance and long-term preservation of open data should take into consideration the
requirements of the different stakeholders. The EC should consider funding measures to create and test tools for
implementing such mechanisms.
There is general agreement that it is important that the EC considers the issue of bioresources/biobanks as
relevant sources of aggregated open research data that have an impact on both science and society.
It is important that such data are shared for the progress of global research, to avoid duplication and to benefit from
large investments in terms of both financial and personnel efforts, including donors’
In consideration of the ethical issues associated to bioresources, only aggregated results can be shared openly
As regards where research data be stored, there was discussion about infrastructures and clouding and about
maintenance and preservation issues during and after a research project involving collection and use of bioresources
Awareness and Impact
Levels of open sharing. Aggregated data
 Data life cycle. Data Management Plan
Awareness, Trust, Binding mechanisms
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
32
RESULTS ACHIEVED
6

33. Where to cite
Standard Bioresource Citation
How to cite
Cite bioresource in the “Methods” section (not in
the acknowledgements)
and add relevant details in the reference list
• Name of biobank / bioresource /
• Institution / Organisation or Network /
• City /
• Country /
• Date accessed
Suggestions
• Use a persistent code rather
than the bioresource name
• Use DOI when available (can
be tracked through cross ref)
• Address the NLM “citing in
medicine” to endorse “our”
citation standard
• Address the NLM to verify the
position of the term
“bioresource” in the MESH
as agreed during the BRIF workshop in Rome, June 2013
RESULTS ACHIEVED
7
Eurosurveillance Editorial Board Meeting. Vilnius, October 11, 2013 -- P. De Castro
Ready to Write an article

34. RESULTS ACHIEVED
8 Publication of the CoBRA guideline, BMC Medicine 2015
Highly accessed article
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
34

35. EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
35
RESULTS ACHIEVED
9 Inclusion of the CoBRA guideline in EQUATOR Network

36. RESULTS ACHIEVED
10 EASE/BRIF Workshop - Dissemination for CoBRA adoption
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
36

37. DISCUSSION POINTS
EASE BRIF Workshop ● Editors as promoters of
good practices in bioresource research.
Toulouse, October 9, 2015
37
• Do you think biouresource is a topic of interest for the
journal?
• Did you ever use/cite bioresources in your journal articles?
• Do you agree to include “CoBRA guidelines” in the
instructions to authors of your journal?
a)How can editors enhance implementation of
CoBRA guidelines?
b)How can researchers enhance implementation
of CoBRA guidelines?
c)How can universities, research institutes or
research infrastructures
incentivise researchers to use CoBRA?
Suggestions from Working groups
addressing different targets
Multidisciplinary approach

38. is waiting for your opinion!
Thank you
paola.decastro@iss.it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGf7jWoJFN0