Grey Literature International Steering Committee
Encyclopedia
The Grey Literature International Steering Committee GLISC was established in 2006 after the 7th International Conference on Grey Literature (GL7) held in Nancy (France) on 5–6 December 2005.
During this conference, the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) (Rome, Italy) presented guidelines for the production of scientific and technical reports documents included in the wider category of grey literature (GL) defined at the International Conferences on Grey Literature held in Luxembourg (1997) and in New York (2004) – as “information produced on all levels of government, academics, business and industry in electronic and print formats not controlled by commercial publishing i.e. where publishing is not the primary activity of the producing body”.
The Italian initiative for the adoption of uniform requirements for the production of reports was discussed during a Round Table on Quality Assessment by a small group of GL producers, librarians and information professionals who agreed to collaborate in the revision of the guidelines proposed by ISS.
The group approving these guidelines – informally known as the “Nancy Group” – has been formally defined as the Grey Literature International Steering Committee (GLISC).
The recommendations are adapted from the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
, produced by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) - better known as “Vancouver Style” (updated February 2006, available from http://www.icmje.org/ and now adopted by more than 500 biomedical journals). These requirements also took into consideration the basic principles of ISO Standard Documentation entitled “Presentation of scientific and technical reports” (ISO 5966/1982) withdrawn in 2000. The ISO 5966 no longer met the requirements of ITC (Information Technology Communication), however, it still provides useful tips in the preparation of reports.
The Guidelines are created primarily to help authors and GL producers in their mutual task of creating and distributing accurate, clear, easily accessible reports in different fields. The goal of the Guidelines is, in fact, to permit an independent and correct production of institutional reports in accordance with basic editorial principles.
The Guidelines include ethical principles related to the process of evaluating, improving, and making reports available and the relationships between GL producers and authors. The latter sections address the more technical aspects of preparing and submitting reports. GLISC believes the entire document is relevant to the concerns of both authors and GL producers.
The Guidelines are informally known as "Nancy style".
Many other institutions all over the world do support and use the GLISC guidelines without a formal agreement which would require longer procedures.
Structure: The guidelines are divided in five sections:
The annex contains references and a list of institutions adopting the guidelines.
Update: The first version 1.0 from March 2006 was updated in July 2007 (version 1.1).
Translation: Version 1.1 was translated in French, German and Italian and Spanish.
Availability: Version 1.1 and translations are available on the GLISC website.
The total content of the Guidelines may be reproduced for educational, not-for-profit purposes without regard for copyright; the Committee encourages distribution of the material.
The GLISC policy is for interested organizations to link to the official English language document at www.glisc.info. The GLISC does not endorse posting of the document on websites other than http://www.glisc.info/ . The GLISC welcomes organizations to reprint or translate this document into languages other than English for no-profit purposes.
*Document type
They are different in that the “Nancy style” represents guidelines – that is general principles agreed upon by a small group of experts, to be followed as an indication or outline of policy or conduct –, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is a proper standard, developed by the Standards Committees of the US National Information Standards Organization (NISO), subject to rigorous control and approval process including peer review. This is why also the structure of the two documents is different since the standard may repeat concepts in different sections which may be used separately, while the Guidelines are intended as an easy to read document giving the general idea for recommended items. The Guidelines, different from standards, do not give full details on format and style. Moreover, the “Nancy style” represents international guidelines developed by a corporate author (GLISC), which worked on the draft proposed by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, and signed approval of this best practice on behalf of their respective organizations, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is a national standard approved by the American National Standards Institute through a number of Voting Members.
*Paper vs digital document medium
The “Nancy style” is mostly paper oriented giving recommendations on report preparation mainly reflecting a traditional paper structure, while the organization pattern of the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is user-based more than content-based. The key concepts incorporated in the American standard mainly refer to metadata, persistence of links, interoperability, creation, discovery/retrieval, presentation in digital format (DTD, XML, XSL), maintenance and preservation (original content, software and media); it also contains a metadata schema, which is absent in the Guidelines.
*Annexes
All material included in the “Nancy style” is approved by the GLISC, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 provides a large amount of additional information (almost half of the pages) that is not part of the Standard (Appendices including selected annotated bibliography, glossary, Dublin Core data elements, etc.).
*Content
In general, the “Nancy style” contains technical requirements for a report, but does not include full details (i.e. format, style, etc.); yet, it provides important elements, which are not present or not fully described in the ANSI/NISO Z39.18.
An initial section is explicitly devoted to authorship, editorship, peer review, conflicts of interest, privacy and confidentiality.
Producers are strongly recommended to issue instructions to guide authors in the production of a formally correct document containing ethical and editorial issues as well as indications for formats, styles, illustrations, etc.
Special attention is given to revision editing as GL is not generally peer reviewed, or produced with editorial support; therefore, it is fundamental that authors be aware of the importance of a careful revision of their texts before diffusion.
The adoption of the “Vancouver style” is recommended and examples and rules are given as a fundamental step for information retrieval.
As regards document structure, it is basically the same in “Nancy style” and ANSI/NISO Z39.18, with minor terminological variations. Yet, the American standard explicitly gives indication on:
– Report Documentation Page (since it is used by some agencies within the federal government, and also some sample pages are given).
– Distribution list.
– Glossary (although not part of the Standard).
– Executive abstract.
*Technical recommendations
Since the “Nancy style” represents guidelines and not a standard, all technical considerations are limited to the essential, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 gives indications (all absent in the “Nancy style”) on:
The Section 6 “Presentation and display” describes standard methods for ensuring consistency in presentation including designing visual and tabular matter, formatting, etc. and makes a distinction between rules applicable to all reports regardless of mode of publication (paper or digital) and rules applicable to reports published in paper form only.
Specific information is provided on fonts, line length, margins, page numbering, style, units and numbers, formulas and equations, paper (format and type), printing equipment, ink.
The ANSI/NISO Z39.18 also includes specifications on index entries and errata, which are not present in the “Nancy style”.
Translations are available in:
The GLISC guidelines and the impact of grey literature on science communication were also appreciated by the European Association of Science Editors
which included a chapter on grey literature in their Science Editor's Handbook.
The use of GLISC guidelines is also supported by the European NECOBELAC Project
Necobelac financed by the European Commission within the [7 Framework program], by the US National Library of Medicine http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html, by the German National Library of Science and Technology http://www.tib-hannover.de/en/special-collections/reports-germany/ and by the French Academic Agency of Francophony http://www.infotheque.info/ressource/9736.html.
Next steps for updating the GLISC Guidelines could be:
The Guidelines should be considered as a suggested model rather than a model in itself; they represent a basic step to improve quality in the different stages of GL production in view of its wider electronic circulation. The proposals for their updating will make them more effective, although a regular revision is required to keep pace with the changing ITC scenarios and information policies (see De Castro et al. 2006).
The “Nancy style” is mostly paper oriented, because editorial consistency and ethical considerations recommended for traditional documents do apply also to digital publications. Yet, progressively more and more GL is being produced, stored, published and made available electronically and in order to manage relevant GL publications, metadata
are required. The importance of metadata, as the natural evolution of library catalogue records, had been already stressed in the first version of the “Nancy style” (when dealing with report structure: Section 4.2 of the Guidelines), but no metadata schema was then provided since it was difficult to find a formula that would satisfy all requirements. At present, much GL is catalogued using the Dublin Core
Metadata Standard (DC). However – as Keith Jeffery of the UK Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC) pointed out working on the “Nancy style” draft – this standard suffers from several problems: a) it is machine-readable but not machine-understandable; b) it does not have a formalised syntax or semantics and therefore is open to ambiguous interpretations. Therefore, he proposed a formalised metadata standard (an umbrella standard, mainly generated from Dublin Core
metadata: “Formalised DC” based on the concepts of the CERIF Model (http://www.eurocris.org/Cerif). Yet, as the traditional cataloguing practice has different rules, similarly different communities may adopt different metadata schema. Nowadays the World Wide Web
provides the possibility to search for information across heterogeneous archives/databases/catalogues, but the systems managing different information resources must be “interoperable” (capable to work together), and interoperability
requires that the same metadata schema be used. As Stefania Biagioni (of the Italian Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie dell’Informazione - ISTI, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
) clearly commented, there is much work towards standardization
and the Dublin Core Initiative (http://dublincore.org/) is receiving worldwide consensus as it suggests adding a very simple metadata record to any specialized one.
*Adoption strategy
When consensus was to be reached to release the first version of the Guidelines, a formal approval was asked to all organizations wishing to officially adopt them. Contrary to expectations, consensus was given only by a small number of institutions as the official adoption was sometimes a difficult step. Yet, support and encouragement did not lack: a less formal approach in launching the Guidelines and getting them adopted was soon granted by all institutions involved in their creation. For example, a large international organization (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD), which took part in the development of the Guidelines, expressed concern to officially endorse them (and in fact, it did not), because that would require a great deal of internal debate and discussion with their own members. Suggestions were made to follow a voluntary system backed up by an official recognition of compliance to facilitate the adoption of the Guidelines. This would encourage like-minded supporters within an organisation to informally use the Guidelines and then gain the official “stamp of approval” to show that they are really following them. Actually, other organizations policies take a voluntary approach in the documents they recommend, such as the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) with more than 230 not-for-profit publishers. As suggested by the OECD, voluntary sign-up is a less demanding step for organisations to take, but the effect is the same – more and more publishers will opt to use them.
During this conference, the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) (Rome, Italy) presented guidelines for the production of scientific and technical reports documents included in the wider category of grey literature (GL) defined at the International Conferences on Grey Literature held in Luxembourg (1997) and in New York (2004) – as “information produced on all levels of government, academics, business and industry in electronic and print formats not controlled by commercial publishing i.e. where publishing is not the primary activity of the producing body”.
The Italian initiative for the adoption of uniform requirements for the production of reports was discussed during a Round Table on Quality Assessment by a small group of GL producers, librarians and information professionals who agreed to collaborate in the revision of the guidelines proposed by ISS.
The group approving these guidelines – informally known as the “Nancy Group” – has been formally defined as the Grey Literature International Steering Committee (GLISC).
The recommendations are adapted from the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
The Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals is a set of guidelines produced by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, for standardising the ethics, preparation and formatting of manuscripts submitted for publication by biomedical journals...
, produced by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) - better known as “Vancouver Style” (updated February 2006, available from http://www.icmje.org/ and now adopted by more than 500 biomedical journals). These requirements also took into consideration the basic principles of ISO Standard Documentation entitled “Presentation of scientific and technical reports” (ISO 5966/1982) withdrawn in 2000. The ISO 5966 no longer met the requirements of ITC (Information Technology Communication), however, it still provides useful tips in the preparation of reports.
The Guidelines are created primarily to help authors and GL producers in their mutual task of creating and distributing accurate, clear, easily accessible reports in different fields. The goal of the Guidelines is, in fact, to permit an independent and correct production of institutional reports in accordance with basic editorial principles.
The Guidelines include ethical principles related to the process of evaluating, improving, and making reports available and the relationships between GL producers and authors. The latter sections address the more technical aspects of preparing and submitting reports. GLISC believes the entire document is relevant to the concerns of both authors and GL producers.
The Guidelines are informally known as "Nancy style".
GLISC members
These are the institutions which officially adopted the "Nancy Style" in the production and distribution of grey literature.- Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) – Rome, Italy
- Institut de l’Information Scientifique et Technique (INISTINISTThe INIST is the CNRS centre of documentation. It has as mission to collect, treat and diffuse results of scientific and technical research. The INIST produces three bibliographic multilingual and multidisciplinary databases: PASCAL, FRANCIS, and DOGE. It is based at Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, in a...
-CNRS) – Nancy, France - Grey Literature Network ServiceGrey Literature Network ServiceThe Grey Literature Network Service is a service to facilitate the production, distribution and access to grey literature. Grey literature is "information produced and distributed on all levels of government, academics, business and industry in electronic and print formats not controlled by...
(GreyNet), Amsterdam – The Netherlands
Many other institutions all over the world do support and use the GLISC guidelines without a formal agreement which would require longer procedures.
The GLISC Guidelines for the production of scientific and technical reports (also known as "Nancy style")
Authorship: The GLISC guidelines were prepared by Paola De Castro and Sandra Salinetti from the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome (Italy). They were critically revised by Joachim Schöpfel and Christiane Stock (INIST-CNRS, Nancy, France), Dominic Farace (GreyNet, Amsterdam, The Netherlands), Catherine Candea and Toby Green (OECD, Paris, France) and Keith G. Jeffery (CCLRC, Chilton Didcot, UK). The work was accompanied by Marcus A. Banks (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA), Stefania Biagioni (ISTI-CNR, Pisa, Italy), June Crowe (Information International Associates Inc., IIA, Oak Ridge, USA) and Markus Weber (Swiss Federal Office of Public Health, Berne, Switzerland).Structure: The guidelines are divided in five sections:
- Statement of purpose
- Ethical considerations (authorship, peer review, confidentiality…)
- Publishing and editorial issues (copyright, institutional repositories, advertising…)
- Report preparation (instructions to authors, report structure, revision editing…)
- General information on the Guidelines
The annex contains references and a list of institutions adopting the guidelines.
Update: The first version 1.0 from March 2006 was updated in July 2007 (version 1.1).
Translation: Version 1.1 was translated in French, German and Italian and Spanish.
Availability: Version 1.1 and translations are available on the GLISC website.
The total content of the Guidelines may be reproduced for educational, not-for-profit purposes without regard for copyright; the Committee encourages distribution of the material.
The GLISC policy is for interested organizations to link to the official English language document at www.glisc.info. The GLISC does not endorse posting of the document on websites other than http://www.glisc.info/ . The GLISC welcomes organizations to reprint or translate this document into languages other than English for no-profit purposes.
Comparison between “Nancy style” and ANSI/NISO Z39.18
The ANSI/NISO Standard Z39.18-2005 Scientific and Technical Reports – Preparation, Presentation, and Preservation (released in 2005) has been considered a valuable source for comparison. The major differences concerning the two documents as a whole regard:*Document type
They are different in that the “Nancy style” represents guidelines – that is general principles agreed upon by a small group of experts, to be followed as an indication or outline of policy or conduct –, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is a proper standard, developed by the Standards Committees of the US National Information Standards Organization (NISO), subject to rigorous control and approval process including peer review. This is why also the structure of the two documents is different since the standard may repeat concepts in different sections which may be used separately, while the Guidelines are intended as an easy to read document giving the general idea for recommended items. The Guidelines, different from standards, do not give full details on format and style. Moreover, the “Nancy style” represents international guidelines developed by a corporate author (GLISC), which worked on the draft proposed by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, and signed approval of this best practice on behalf of their respective organizations, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is a national standard approved by the American National Standards Institute through a number of Voting Members.
*Paper vs digital document medium
The “Nancy style” is mostly paper oriented giving recommendations on report preparation mainly reflecting a traditional paper structure, while the organization pattern of the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 is user-based more than content-based. The key concepts incorporated in the American standard mainly refer to metadata, persistence of links, interoperability, creation, discovery/retrieval, presentation in digital format (DTD, XML, XSL), maintenance and preservation (original content, software and media); it also contains a metadata schema, which is absent in the Guidelines.
*Annexes
All material included in the “Nancy style” is approved by the GLISC, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 provides a large amount of additional information (almost half of the pages) that is not part of the Standard (Appendices including selected annotated bibliography, glossary, Dublin Core data elements, etc.).
*Content
In general, the “Nancy style” contains technical requirements for a report, but does not include full details (i.e. format, style, etc.); yet, it provides important elements, which are not present or not fully described in the ANSI/NISO Z39.18.
- Ethical issues
An initial section is explicitly devoted to authorship, editorship, peer review, conflicts of interest, privacy and confidentiality.
- Instructions for authors
Producers are strongly recommended to issue instructions to guide authors in the production of a formally correct document containing ethical and editorial issues as well as indications for formats, styles, illustrations, etc.
- Revision
Special attention is given to revision editing as GL is not generally peer reviewed, or produced with editorial support; therefore, it is fundamental that authors be aware of the importance of a careful revision of their texts before diffusion.
- Reference style
The adoption of the “Vancouver style” is recommended and examples and rules are given as a fundamental step for information retrieval.
As regards document structure, it is basically the same in “Nancy style” and ANSI/NISO Z39.18, with minor terminological variations. Yet, the American standard explicitly gives indication on:
– Report Documentation Page (since it is used by some agencies within the federal government, and also some sample pages are given).
– Distribution list.
– Glossary (although not part of the Standard).
– Executive abstract.
*Technical recommendations
Since the “Nancy style” represents guidelines and not a standard, all technical considerations are limited to the essential, while the ANSI/NISO Z39.18 gives indications (all absent in the “Nancy style”) on:
- Print-specific/non-print-specific recommendations
The Section 6 “Presentation and display” describes standard methods for ensuring consistency in presentation including designing visual and tabular matter, formatting, etc. and makes a distinction between rules applicable to all reports regardless of mode of publication (paper or digital) and rules applicable to reports published in paper form only.
- Format
Specific information is provided on fonts, line length, margins, page numbering, style, units and numbers, formulas and equations, paper (format and type), printing equipment, ink.
The ANSI/NISO Z39.18 also includes specifications on index entries and errata, which are not present in the “Nancy style”.
Support, Translation and Updating of the "Nancy Style"
Many institutions considered the relevance of the GLISC Guidelines for the production and distribution of technical reports and for educational purposed, therefore, accepted to carry out the translation of the original English version into different languases.Translations are available in:
- Italian - traslation carried out by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità
. The ISS published a technical report on "Grey literature in scientific communication: “Nancy style” to guarantee editorial quality of technical reports", including the traslation of the GLISC guidelines Rapporti ISTISAN 06/55 - French - traslation carried out by INIST - Institute for Scientific and Technical Information - France http://international.inist.fr/article34.html
- German translation carried out by Technischen Informationsbibliothek (TIB), Hannover - Germany
- Spanish - translation carried out by Universidad de Salamanca - Spain
The GLISC guidelines and the impact of grey literature on science communication were also appreciated by the European Association of Science Editors
European Association of Science Editors
The ' is a non-profit membership organisation for people interested in science communication and editing. Founded in 1982, in France, EASE now has an international membership from diverse backgrounds and professional experience....
which included a chapter on grey literature in their Science Editor's Handbook.
The use of GLISC guidelines is also supported by the European NECOBELAC Project
NECOBELAC Project
The NECOBELAC Project is a network of collaboration between Europe and Latin American Caribbean countries to spread know-how in scientific writing and provide the best tools to exploit open access information for the safeguard of public health....
Necobelac financed by the European Commission within the [7 Framework program], by the US National Library of Medicine http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html, by the German National Library of Science and Technology http://www.tib-hannover.de/en/special-collections/reports-germany/ and by the French Academic Agency of Francophony http://www.infotheque.info/ressource/9736.html.
Next steps for updating the GLISC Guidelines could be:
- Adding an Appendix on metadata
- Creating a Subject index
- Providing more technical advice on digital format
- Facilitating reference
The Guidelines should be considered as a suggested model rather than a model in itself; they represent a basic step to improve quality in the different stages of GL production in view of its wider electronic circulation. The proposals for their updating will make them more effective, although a regular revision is required to keep pace with the changing ITC scenarios and information policies (see De Castro et al. 2006).
On the development of the GLISC Guidelines
*Electronic grey literatureThe “Nancy style” is mostly paper oriented, because editorial consistency and ethical considerations recommended for traditional documents do apply also to digital publications. Yet, progressively more and more GL is being produced, stored, published and made available electronically and in order to manage relevant GL publications, metadata
Metadata
The term metadata is an ambiguous term which is used for two fundamentally different concepts . Although the expression "data about data" is often used, it does not apply to both in the same way. Structural metadata, the design and specification of data structures, cannot be about data, because at...
are required. The importance of metadata, as the natural evolution of library catalogue records, had been already stressed in the first version of the “Nancy style” (when dealing with report structure: Section 4.2 of the Guidelines), but no metadata schema was then provided since it was difficult to find a formula that would satisfy all requirements. At present, much GL is catalogued using the Dublin Core
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata terms are a set of vocabulary terms which can be used to describe resources for the purposes of discovery. The terms can be used to describe a full range of web resources: video, images, web pages etc and physical resources such as books and objects like artworks...
Metadata Standard (DC). However – as Keith Jeffery of the UK Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC) pointed out working on the “Nancy style” draft – this standard suffers from several problems: a) it is machine-readable but not machine-understandable; b) it does not have a formalised syntax or semantics and therefore is open to ambiguous interpretations. Therefore, he proposed a formalised metadata standard (an umbrella standard, mainly generated from Dublin Core
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata terms are a set of vocabulary terms which can be used to describe resources for the purposes of discovery. The terms can be used to describe a full range of web resources: video, images, web pages etc and physical resources such as books and objects like artworks...
metadata: “Formalised DC” based on the concepts of the CERIF Model (http://www.eurocris.org/Cerif). Yet, as the traditional cataloguing practice has different rules, similarly different communities may adopt different metadata schema. Nowadays the World Wide Web
World Wide Web
The World Wide Web is a system of interlinked hypertext documents accessed via the Internet...
provides the possibility to search for information across heterogeneous archives/databases/catalogues, but the systems managing different information resources must be “interoperable” (capable to work together), and interoperability
Interoperability
Interoperability is a property referring to the ability of diverse systems and organizations to work together . The term is often used in a technical systems engineering sense, or alternatively in a broad sense, taking into account social, political, and organizational factors that impact system to...
requires that the same metadata schema be used. As Stefania Biagioni (of the Italian Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie dell’Informazione - ISTI, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
The Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche or National Research Council, is an Italian public organization set up to support scientific and technological research. Its headquarters are in Rome.-History:The institution was founded in 1923...
) clearly commented, there is much work towards standardization
Standardization
Standardization is the process of developing and implementing technical standards.The goals of standardization can be to help with independence of single suppliers , compatibility, interoperability, safety, repeatability, or quality....
and the Dublin Core Initiative (http://dublincore.org/) is receiving worldwide consensus as it suggests adding a very simple metadata record to any specialized one.
*Adoption strategy
When consensus was to be reached to release the first version of the Guidelines, a formal approval was asked to all organizations wishing to officially adopt them. Contrary to expectations, consensus was given only by a small number of institutions as the official adoption was sometimes a difficult step. Yet, support and encouragement did not lack: a less formal approach in launching the Guidelines and getting them adopted was soon granted by all institutions involved in their creation. For example, a large international organization (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD), which took part in the development of the Guidelines, expressed concern to officially endorse them (and in fact, it did not), because that would require a great deal of internal debate and discussion with their own members. Suggestions were made to follow a voluntary system backed up by an official recognition of compliance to facilitate the adoption of the Guidelines. This would encourage like-minded supporters within an organisation to informally use the Guidelines and then gain the official “stamp of approval” to show that they are really following them. Actually, other organizations policies take a voluntary approach in the documents they recommend, such as the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) with more than 230 not-for-profit publishers. As suggested by the OECD, voluntary sign-up is a less demanding step for organisations to take, but the effect is the same – more and more publishers will opt to use them.
See also
- Scientific literatureScientific literatureScientific literature comprises scientific publications that report original empirical and theoretical work in the natural and social sciences, and within a scientific field is often abbreviated as the literature. Academic publishing is the process of placing the results of one's research into the...
- Technical reportTechnical reportA technical report is a document that describes the process, progress, or results of technical or scientific research or the state of a technical or scientific research problem. It might also include recommendations and conclusions of the research...
- Gray literatureGray literatureGray literature is a field in library and information science. The term is used variably by the intellectual community, librarians, and medical and research professionals to refer to a body of materials that cannot be found easily through conventional channels such as publishers, "but which is...
- European Association of Science EditorsEuropean Association of Science EditorsThe ' is a non-profit membership organisation for people interested in science communication and editing. Founded in 1982, in France, EASE now has an international membership from diverse backgrounds and professional experience....
- OpenSIGLEOpenSIGLEThe OpenSIGLE repository provides open access to the bibliographic records of the former SIGLE database. The creation of the OpenSIGLE archive was decided by some major European STI centres, members of the former European network EAGLE for the collection and dissemination of grey literature...
- Scientific writingScientific writing-History:Scientific writing in English started in the 14th century.The Royal Society established good practice for scientific writing. Founder member Thomas Sprat wrote on the importance of plain and accurate description rather than rhetorical flourishes in his History of the Royal Society of London...
- Academic authorshipAcademic authorshipAcademic authorship of journal articles, books and other original works is a means by which academics communicate the results of their scholarly work, establish priority for their discoveries, and build their reputation among their peers. Authorship is a primary basis on which many academics are...
External links
- GLISC http://www.glisc.info/
- Istituto Superiore di Sanità http://www.iss.it/
- INIST-CNRS http://www.inist.fr
- Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals http://www.icmje.org/