|
|
| (22 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| ==Open review on-line, a new model in publishing conference abstracts.==
| | [[Image:Biosysbio logo 2007.jpg|700px]] |
| I wanted to start a discussion about whether OWW could be used for people to edit their abstracts that they submit to the conference [http://www.biosysbio.com BioSysBio & Young Bioinformaticians Forum] that I'm involved with (Manchester 2007).
| |
|
| |
|
| After the short [[Talk:BioSysBio|discussion]], I have posted a plan for the open review. please let me know what you think. I think it might work, but it almosts seems like it might be more hassle than it it worth. --[[User:Johncumbers|Johncumbers]] 21:54, 15 July 2006 (EDT)
| | [http://www.biosysbio.com BioSysBio 2007] will be held at the Manchester Interdisciplinary Biocentre. It is aimed at students, post-docs and junior faculty working in biotechnology and all are welcome to attend. The conference will include sessions in Computational Systems Biology, Bioinformatics and Synthetic Biology. |
|
| |
|
| ==Open Review==
| | *[[BioSysBio:Conference Programme With Videos|Conference Programme With Videos]] |
| '''Aim:''' We want to create an on-line community of scientists that aides collaboration and communication between different researchers. That come together at a conference to present and discuss science. The conference does not begin and end in January, it starts on-line before the conference and we hope it will continue there afterwards as well. www.openwetware.org is already a growing community of scientists and would be a good place to host this.
| | *Published abstracts will beadded here in March/April |
| | | *[[BioSysBio:abstracts | Submitted abstracts can be seen here.]] |
| #Open conference registration July 06 without payment. (tell people that registration does not mean they have been accepted yet) publicise and register delegates.
| | *[[BioSysBio:workshops | Workshops can be seen here.]] |
| #Ask for short abstracts < 300 words due in late September. (These are kept private on a password protected website)
| |
| #Get session chairs to do a brief review on-line and reject any unsuitable. If we register more than we have capacity for then reject the lowest scoring abstracts to bring the number to venue capacity 160. Accept all others for posters and maybe for oral presentations. (to be decided after open review period)
| |
| #Early October - Ask delegates whose abstracts were accepted to pay registration fee on-line.
| |
| #Ask delegates to publish a longer abstract on the web, including results, pictures, tables and as much supplementary information as the delegate wants to add on other pages (using the wiki at www.openwetware.org) by end of October, they have 1 month to prepare images/ tables, get used to wiki.
| |
| #November is the month of Open Review, where all other delegates are invited to post comments and questions on the web (longer abstracts invite more comments/questions). Open review closes at the end of November. The session chairs then review the long abstracts and make the decision about who will speak at the conference based on these (they should be higher quality due to the open review period). Speakers are notified December 11th (1 month before conference)
| |
| #All posters published on-line two weeks before conference.
| |
| #Publication deadline is 2 weeks after the speaker decisions have been made
| |
| #Abstracts to be published are formatted and posted in journal format on-line. Long abstracts collated and sent to journal.
| |
| #comments added to web after conference as well.
| |
| | |
| *The above plan addressesd the fact that people won't want their results public too far before the conference, because they are only made public at the end of October. 2 months before the conference. Is this still too far before?
| |
| *What if they want to change their original title/abstract after it has been accepted?
| |
