Canada joins PMC International

Canada Joins International Effort to Provide Access to Health Research:  “PubMed Central repository will open new pathway to Canadian health research“, News Release, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), July 6, 2009. [Connotea bookmark][FriendFeed entry]. Excerpt:

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the National Research Council’s Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information (NRC-CISTI), and the US National Library of Medicine (NLM) have announced a three-way partnership to establish PubMed Central Canada (PMC Canada). PMC Canada will be a national digital repository of peer-reviewed health and life sciences literature, including research resulting from CIHR funding. This searchable Web-based repository will be permanent, stable and freely accessible.

See also: PMC International (PMCI). Excerpt:

To date, NLM [US National Library of Medicine] has authorized two PMCI centers: UKPMC and PMC Canada.

Some background: PubMed Central Canada (PMC Canada) initiative, Kumiko Vezina, OA Librarian, September 17, 2008. Excerpt:

Before this [PMC Canada] can go forward, however, the second and final step of the agreement process must be completed. That would be for CISTI and CIHR to jointly approach the US National Library Medicine to co-sponsor the service, as a mirror site to PubMed Central therefore obtaining a 3-way agreement between CISTI, CIHR and the US National Library of Medicine to ‘officially’ enter into the PubMed Central International (PMCI) network. Once the final agreement is in place, development will begin on the first phase of PMC Canada thus enabling CIHR researchers to deposit their publications into PubMed Central.

More background information is available from the NRC-CISTI Partnership Development Office. (The current version of this webpage was last updated on February 12, 2009).

Comment: It’s good news that the 3-way partnership is now in place. The initial release of PMC Canada is expected to be available in the fall of 2009.

Advertisements

8 Comments »

  1. What Canada needs is not yet another central repository, but more mandates by institutions (and funders) for their employees (and fundees) to deposit directly in their own institutional repositories (the universal providers of all research, funded and unfunded, across all subjects, biomedical or otherwise). The institutional deposits can then be harvested into whatever subject-specific central collections one wishes to create. Mandating direct central deposit simply makes funder mandates compete with institutional mandates, at the cost of needlessly slowing and handicapping instead of facilitating and accelerating progress toward universal Open Access to all research, funded and unfunded, across all subjects, biomedical or otherwise: http://bit.ly/ECAuA

  2. Jim Till said

    See PMC Overview for a concise statement about the value of PubMed Central.

  3. The value of PubMed Central (PMC) is great and indisputable. That is not what is at issue. What is at issue is (1) WHERE TO DEPOSIT (should researchers be mandated to deposit directly in PMC or in their own institution’s repository, from which PMC — and other central services — can harvest?) and (2) WHO SHOULD DEPOSIT (the author or the publisher?).

    The links I provided above in — http://bit.ly/ECAuA — explain the reasons why (1) the locus of deposit for both funder and institutional mandates should be the institutional repository and not PMC or any other central service and the reasons why (2) deposit should be done by the mandatee author, and not a third party, such as a publisher. The reasons discussed are very specific and matter a great deal for the practical success and effectiveness of OA mandates. They deserve to be reflected upon in order to ensure that funder and institutional policies are compatible, coherent, and can systematically scale globally.

  4. Jim Till said

    Some history: There have been many posts about the subject “Central vs. Distributed Archives” to the American Scientist Open Access Forum (which Stevan Harnad moderates). Early ones can be found by searching for the key word “Distributed” in the archive American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum By Thread. (Posts dated between August 25, 1998 and June 23, 2006 are archived at this site). The first post found by such a search was Central vs. Distributed Archives, by Stevan Harnad, dated June 28, 1999. This same post, entitled “Central” vs. “Distributed” Archives: A Red Herring, is post #188 in another archive, American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum archives – 1999. So, the topic “Central vs. Distributed Archives” has been discussed for at least a decade. This discussion seems likely to continue.

  5. Discussion will doubtless continue, relentlessly. What I was hoping to encourage was deeper reflection on the reasons already many times adduced but not appreciated — and then practical action.

  6. Jim Till said

    The viewpoint of Francis Collins can be expected to be influential, if he indeed becomes the next NIH Director.

  7. Jim Till said

    The News Release about PMC Canada has been noted in several FriendFeed entries.

  8. Jim Till said

    See also this blog post and attached comments: Hark – PubMedCentral Canada on the horizon! by Devon Greyson, Social Justice Librarian, July 15, 2009.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: