Making science public: a review of journalists' use of Open Access research.

Science journalists are uniquely positioned to increase the societal impact of open research outputs by contextualizing and communicating findings in ways that highlight their relevance and implications for non-specialist audiences. Yet, it is unclear to what degree journalists use open research outputs, such as open access publications or preprints, in their reporting; what factors motivate or constrain this use; and how the recent surge in openly available research seen during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected this. This article examines these questions through a review of relevant literature published from 2018 onwards-particularly literature relating to the COVID-19 pandemic-as well as seminal articles outside the search dates. We find that research that explicitly examines journalists' engagement with open access publications or preprints is scarce, with existing literature mostly addressing the topic tangentially or as a secondary concern, rather than a primary focus. Still, the limited body of evidence points to several factors that may hamper journalists' use of these outputs and thus warrant further exploration. These include an overreliance on traditional criteria for evaluating scientific quality; concerns about the trustworthiness of open research outputs; and challenges using and verifying the findings. We also find that, while the COVID-19 pandemic encouraged journalists to explore open research outputs such as preprints, the extent to which these explorations will become established journalistic practices remains unclear. Furthermore, we note that current research is overwhelmingly authored and focused on the Global North, and the United States specifically. We conclude with recommendations for future research that attend to issues of equity and diversity, and more explicitly examine the intersections of open access and science journalism.

Gender bias and menstrual blood in stem cell research: A review of pubmed articles (2008-2020).

Despite proven scientific quality of menstrual blood mesenchymal cells, research and science output using those cells is still incipient, which suggests there is a resistance to the study of this type of cell by scientists, and a lack of attention to its potential for cell therapy, regenerative medicine and bioengineering. This study analyzes the literature about the menstrual blood mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (mbMSC) on the PubMed database between 2008-2020 and the social attention it received on Twitter. A comparative analysis showed that mbMSC accounts for a very small portion of mesenchymal cell research (0.25%). Most first authors are women (53.2%), whereas most last authors are men (63.74%), reinforcing an already known, and still significant, gender gap between last and corresponding authors. Menstrual blood tends to be less used in experiments and its scientific value tends to be underestimated, which brings gender bias to a technical and molecular level. Although women are more positive in the mbMSC debate on Twitter, communication efforts toward visibility and public interest in menstrual cells has room to grow.

Local chatter or international buzz? Language differences on posts about Zika research on Twitter and Facebook.

BACKGROUND: When the Zika virus outbreak became a global health emergency in early 2016, the scientific community responded with an increased output of Zika-related research. This upsurge in research naturally made its way into academic journals along with editorials, news, and reports. However, it is not yet known how or whether these scholarly communications were distributed to the populations most affected by Zika. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To understand how scientific outputs about Zika reached global and local audiences, we collected Tweets and Facebook posts that linked to Zika-related research in the first six months of 2016. Using a language detection algorithm, we found that up to 90% of Twitter and 76% of Facebook posts are in English. However, when none of the authors of the scholarly article are from English-speaking countries, posts on both social media are less likely to be in English. The effect is most pronounced on Facebook, where the likelihood of posting in English is between 11 and 16% lower when none of the authors are from English-speaking countries, as compared to when some or all are. Similarly, posts about papers written with a Brazilian author are 13% more likely to be in Portuguese on Facebook than when made on Twitter. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our main conclusion is that scholarly communication on Twitter and Facebook of Zika-related research is dominated by English, despite Brazil being the epicenter of the Zika epidemic. This result suggests that scholarly findings about the Zika virus are unlikely to be distributed directly to relevant populations through these popular online mediums. Nevertheless, there are differences between platforms. Compared to Twitter, scholarly communication on Facebook is more likely to be in the language of an author's country. The Zika outbreak provides a useful case-study for understanding how scientific outputs are communicated to relevant populations. Our results suggest that Facebook is a more effective channel than Twitter, if communication is desired to be in the native language of the affected country. Further research should explore how local media-such as governmental websites, newspapers and magazines, as well as television and radio-disseminate scholarly publication.

Brazilian science communication research: national and international contributions.

Science communication has emerged as a new field over the last 50 years, and its progress has been marked by a rise in jobs, training courses, research, associations, conferences and publications. This paper describes science communication internationally and the trends and challenges it faces, before looking at the national level. We have documented science communication activities in Brazil, the training courses, research, financial support and associations/societies. By analyzing the publication of papers, dissertations and theses we have tracked the growth of this field, and compared the level of activity in Brazil with other countries. Brazil has boosted its national research publications since 2002, with a bigger contribution from postgraduate programs in education and communication, but compared to its national research activity Brazil has only a small international presence in science communication. The language barrier, the tradition of publishing in national journals and the solid roots in education are some of the reasons for that. Brazil could improve its international participation, first by considering collaborations within Latin America. International publication is dominated by the USA and the UK. There is a need to take science communication to the next level by developing more sophisticated tools for conceptualizing and analyzing science communication, and Brazil can be part of that.

O Fantástico apresenta a AIDS ao Público (1983-1992) / The Fantástico introduces AIDS to the people (1983-1992)

Mostra que na história da Aids a televisão desempenhou papel-chave ao apresentá-la à população, em um momento de enorme desinformação, muito antes que os governos, profissionais da saúde e pesquisadores tivessesm respostas seguras sobre ela. Até 1985, a doença não tinha sido incluída na agenda governamental brasileira, por ser vista como de ocorrências isoladas, restrita a segmentos sociais específicos. A partir de então, o Ministério da Saúde estabeleceu as diretrizes para o Programa de Controle da Aids.

A primeira década da AIDS no Brasil: o Fantástico apresenta a doença ao público (1983-1992) / The first decade of AIDS in Brazil: the Fantástico introduces the disease (1983-1992)

Analisa como a Síndrome da Imunodeficiência Adquirida (Aids), maior epidemia do século XX, foi divulgada pelo programa Fantástico, da Rede Globo de televisão, entre 1983 e 1992, primeira década em que a doença aparece na mídia brasileira.

A televisão contribuindo para a história das doenças / The TV contribution to the history of diseases

Analisa como a Aids foi divulgada pelo programa Fantástico, da Rede Globo de televisão, entre 1983 e 1992. A televisão desempenhou papel chave ao apresentar a doença ao público, muito antes que os governos, profissionais da saúde e pesquisadores tivessem respostas seguras sobre a doença. Foram analisados 26 programas.(AU)

O Fantástico apresenta a AIDS ao Público (1983-1992) / The Fantástico introduces AIDS to the people (1983-1992)

Mostra que na história da Aids a televisão desempenhou papel-chave ao apresentá-la à população, em um momento de enorme desinformação, muito antes que os governos, profissionais da saúde e pesquisadores tivessesm respostas seguras sobre ela. Até 1985, a doença não tinha sido incluída na agenda governamental brasileira, por ser vista como de ocorrências isoladas, restrita a segmentos sociais específicos. A partir de então, o Ministério da Saúde estabeleceu as diretrizes para o Programa de Controle da Aids.(AU)

A primeira década da AIDS no Brasil: o "Fantástico" apresenta a doença ao público (1983-1992) / The first decade of AIDS in Brazil: the "Fantástico" introduces the disease (1983-1992)

Analisa como a Síndrome da Imunodeficiência Adquirida (Aids), maior epidemia do século XX, foi divulgada pelo programa "Fantástico", da Rede Globo de televisäo, entre 1983 e 1992, primeira década em que a doença aparece na mídia brasileira.(AU)