Monday, 16 January 2017

The Rise of Altmetrics | Medical Journals and Publishing | JAMA | The JAMA Network

 Source: http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2596302

Viewpoint
January 10, 2017

The Rise of Altmetrics

JAMA. 2017;317(2):131-132. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.18346






With the world’s academic
output currently standing at 2.5 million articles per year and doubling
every 9 years, sifting the relevant from the irrelevant is vital for
researchers, publishers, and funding bodies.
Until recently, the influence of a published article
would primarily be measured by its citations, a slow process resulting
in a long wait before the importance of an article is truly recognized.
Views of the article (including PDF and HTML) are another measure of
importance, but views can also accumulate slowly. Altmetrics are
increasingly recognized tools that aim to measure the real-time reach
and influence of an academic article.
Altmetric scores quantify the digital attention an
article receives in a multitude of online sources. Social media,
Wikipedia, public policy documents, blogs, and mainstream news are
tracked and screened by the Altmetric database. References to research
outputs are traced back to their unique identifier code. The Altmetric
algorithm produces a weighted score to reflect the relative reach of
each source. For instance, blogs are weighted differently than a
mainstream news report. This process allows the attention an individual
article receives to be measured from the moment the article is
published.
Source data are used to generate the distinctive and
colorful Altmetric “donut” as a graphic representation of the reach of
an article. Each colored stripe in the donut represents a different
platform on which the article has been mentioned, as demonstrated in the
Figure.
Altmetric donuts are often used by publishers, institutions, and
researchers to showcase the dissemination of their research output.
Figure.
The Altmetric Donut
The Altmetric Donut
The
Altmetric donut illustrates the dissemination of a research output
through different channels. Each colored stripe represents a different
platform on which the work was mentioned. The central number is the
Altmetric score.
Altmetrics complement standard citation scores and views
in quantifying the interest and debate an article generates, from the
moment it is published. Altmetric scores enable potential readers to
quickly filter the wealth of scientific literature that is published and
to identify articles that are generating interest.
For the past 3 years Altmetric has published a list of
the top 100–scoring articles, arguably representing the 100 most
influential scientific publications of the year.1
The list of the top 100 articles in 2015 provides an indication of the
most widely discussed scientific literature from November 2014 to
November 2015. Analysis of these articles enables consideration of what
kinds of articles have captured the interest of the general public and
stimulated discussion.
Thirty-four different journals were represented in the 2015 Altmetric top 100. Established, high-impact journals such as Nature and Science
constituted a significant share of the top 100, with 14 and 13
articles, respectively. Newer journals were also strongly represented,
such as PLoS ONE with 6 articles, possibly reflecting its open access model.
The majority of articles in the top 100 were published
by universities and research centers, although Google and Facebook also
contributed articles, recognizing the contribution of corporate bodies
to modern research.
Analysis of the top 100 articles highlights the themes
that have attracted the most widespread online attention. Altmetrics
classify each article in the top 100 according to subject. In 2015,
medical and health science articles represented 36 of the top 100,
making this the most popular subject. Biological sciences were the
second most popular subject with 17 articles, studies in human society
accounted for 11 articles, and earth and environmental sciences had 10
articles. The remaining articles were described as information and
computer sciences (8 articles), physical sciences (7), research and
reproducibility (7), and history and archaeology (4).
To understand which topics generated the most online
engagement within the field of medical and health sciences, the titles
of these 36 articles were reviewed and screened for recurrent themes or
key words. For example, the top Altmetric-scoring article, “A New
Antibiotic Kills Pathogens Without Detectable Resistance”2 published in Nature, was associated with the themes microbiology and antibiotic resistance.
The most frequently occurring theme in the medical and
health science articles was diet, featured in 11 of the 36 titles.
Closely following diet, 10 of the 36 articles referred to human
mortality and various factors influencing it. Other recurring themes
included exercise (4 articles), cancer (3), and global health (3).
Only a single surgical journal appeared in the top 100 in 2015. Published in BJU International, a systematic review of flaccid and erect penis length and circumference and novel nomogram from more than 15 000 men3 was 46th among the top 100.
The frequency at which medical and health sciences
appear highlights the widespread interest in human health and disease.
However, this interest appears to be largely limited to topics directly
relevant to the general public, such as diet and exercise. The concept
of a healthy lifestyle contributing to a longer, healthier life is not
new, but it still generates significant online public engagement.
It is important to interpret Altmetric scores with
caution. Although these scores provide a powerful tool in recognizing
the reach of an article in real time, they are not a direct substitute
for traditional markers of scientific importance. If taken in isolation,
Altmetric scores might further promote and legitimize sensationalized
outcomes.
Certainly a number of articles in the top 100 have been
regularly cited in the scientific literature, such as the previously
mentioned top-scoring paper of 2015 with a current citation count of
277.2
In comparison, the article in the Altmetric second position, which
supports the lack of link between autism and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR)
vaccination among children with older siblings with autism, has been
cited 19 times.4
Although this article has been viewed more than 153 000 times, it seems
the controversy and widely held public misconceptions surrounding MMR
vaccination have influenced its Altmetric score, rather than at this
point contributing to a substantial number of citations. Review of the
2015 Altmetric top 100 articles did not demonstrate a clear link between
Altmetric score and number of citations. Research suggests a higher
Altmetric score can be linked to a higher citation count, but the
magnitude of the correlation is unclear.5
The importance of public engagement with scientific
output should not be underestimated. Research output contributes to the
continuing interest and education in scientific fields and inspires the
scientists of tomorrow. Altmetrics provide a powerful tool with which to
measure this interest.
Thematic analysis of the Altmetric top 100 articles of
2015 has demonstrated that despite thousands of years of evolution in
society and the increasing complexity in day-to-day lives, the most
basic human instincts of food, survival, and reproduction captured the
attention in the literature in 2015.

Back to top

Article Information
Corresponding Author:
Hannah R. Warren, MBBS, MPhys, The Urology Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’
NHS Foundation Trust, Great Maze Pond, London SE1 9RT, England (hannah.warren2@nhs.net).
Conflict of Interest Disclosures:
All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure
of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.

References
1.
Altmetric. Altmetric top 100 articles 2015. https://www.altmetric.com/top100/2015/. Accessed October 3, 2016.
2.
Ling
 LL, Schneider
 T, Peoples
 AJ,
 et al.  A new antibiotic kills pathogens without detectable resistance. Nature. 2015;517(7535):455-459.
PubMedArticle
3.
Veale
 D, Miles
 S, Bramley
 S, Muir
 G, Hodsoll
 J.  Am I normal? a systematic review and construction of
nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to
15,521 men. BJU Int. 2015;115(6):978-986.
PubMedArticle
4.
Jain
 A, Marshall
 J, Buikema
 A, Bancroft
 T, Kelly
 JP, Newschaffer
 CJ.  Autism occurrence by MMR vaccine status among US children with older siblings with and without autism. JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540.
PubMedArticle
5.
Thelwall
 M, Haustein
 S, Larivière
 V, Sugimoto
 CR.  Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e64841.
PubMedArticle


The Rise of Altmetrics | Medical Journals and Publishing | JAMA | The JAMA Network

Sunday, 15 January 2017

Video abstracts, the latest trend in scientific publishing | University Affairs

 Source: http://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/video-abstracts-the-latest-trend-in-scientific-publishing/

Video abstracts, the latest trend in scientific publishing

Will "publish or perish" soon include "video or vanish"?
By JACOB BERKOWITZ | February 6, 2013

lights_action_abstract_448x200
In the fall of 2010, Barry Sanders and colleagues worked intensely to
finesse the lighting, angles and timing of their cutting-edge research
in their laboratory at the University of Calgary Institute for Quantum
Information Science. They were in pursuit of something revolutionary: a
workable qubit – the quantum equivalent of a classical computer bit –
the anticipated building block of quantum computers.


Finally, in January 2011 they shared the exciting results of their painstaking work with the world. On YouTube.





video_play_icon_100x100





Video abstracts for beginners



Advice on how to make your first (or next) video abstract.
That’s where, along with videos of preteens clutching stuffies and
singing along to Justin Bieber, and of cats getting into boxes, you can watch the video abstract of Dr. Sanders’ co-authored New Journal of Physics article, “Dangling-bond charge qubit on a silicon surface.”


The video takes viewers into the stainless steel-and-wires maze of a
quantum physics lab and includes clever animations that bring qubits to
life. “In four minutes of watching the video you can figure out what the
paper’s about without reading a page,” asserts Dr. Sanders, the
institute’s director.


Welcome to the new world of the video abstract of scholarly articles.
The intersection of the academic journal article, the Internet and
point-and-shoot digital video cameras has given birth to one of the
first major innovations to the scholarly article in the past century:
peer-to-peer video summaries, three to five minutes long, of academic
papers.


Yet, for all this academic video innovation, it’s still unclear
whether the publish-or-perish adage will evolve to include “video or
vanish.” Will video abstracts find their place in Internet history as a
niche academic novelty? Or does the future of writing a journal article
include hitting the “record” button?


There aren’t any official industry statistics, but at least a dozen
academic publishers with a collective portfolio of hundreds of journals,
on topics from urology to quantum physics, already give authors the
opportunity to post a video abstract along with their print article.
These video summaries – the first may have been a Cell Press
video posted on May 21, 2009 (see video below), that’s garnered more
than 11,000 views – are the latest offspring of the same converging
technological forces that have spawned online-only journals and the push
for open-access academic publishing.




“Video abstracts grew out of the realization that the Internet allows
us to communicate with each other in ways that were never before
possible,” says John Kuemmerle, online editor of the journal Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “It allows us to personalize our papers in ways that were never before possible.”


He makes this pitch to prospective authors
on the journal’s YouTube channel, an outlet that features more than 350
video abstracts. With publishers and journals fighting for article
citations and high impact, these video abstracts are a longed-for
multimedia marketing tool to entice readers – and, more importantly, a
growing number of viewers.


“We see younger researchers using video abstracts to scan literature
quickly,” explains Cameron Macdonald, executive director of the
Ottawa-based publisher Canadian Science Publishing (formerly NRC
Research Press). The press has launched a video abstract option
for authors who are publishing in its 15 journals. “We hope that the
videos serve to extend the reach of the research article, making it more
discoverable,” says Mr. Macdonald.


The trend reflects an increasingly video-driven Internet. YouTube is
now the second-most used web search engine, after Google.  And, this
past December, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins became the latest
publisher to offer an iPad application that allows people to toggle back
and forth between the video abstract and the article.


Yet for Barry Sanders and others like him in the physical and health
sciences, video abstracts are less about pitch and more about product.
They’re a natural outgrowth of video and the way it allows scientists to
share complex information visually.


“One of the real revolutions in the reporting of science has been
YouTube,” contends Harvard University chemist George Whitesides, in an
online video about the new role of video in scientific communication.



If you go back 20 years, “you had to be able to describe your science
in words, or tables, or in plots, in two-dimensions on a piece of
paper,” says Dr. Whitesides. “With videos, you can now describe dynamic
phenomena which are simply too complicated, too complex, too unusual,
too full of information to do in words and two-dimensional pictures.”


Dr. Sanders, a Canadian pioneer and proponent of video abstracts,
says it was this new frontier of scientific visualization of quantum
physics that spurred him to encourage the New Journal of Physics
to launch its video abstracts in the spring of 2011. The open-access,
online-only journal jumped at the opportunity. The journal “has always
strived to take advantage of the online medium by discarding barriers
that are traditionally associated with print,” says Tim Smith, its
senior publisher.


It seems that both authors and readers are adapting to the little screen. About 10 percent of the New Journal of Physics authors include a video abstract; the journal’s 118 video abstracts
(as of January 2013) had racked up more than 69,000 views, all told.
And, based on the journal’s tracking of article downloads, Dr. Smith
says he’s confident the video abstracts are playing a significant role
in driving readers to the full-text article.


Not all journals have been as welcoming of the video camera’s gaze.
“I’m involved with other journals,” comments Dr. Sanders, “where if you
want to change anything you get bogged down in years of discussion in
committees.”


With many scholarly journals, these discussions have revolved around
how the new video kid-on-the-block fits into the tradition of peer
review. Publishers and journal editors that have embraced YouTube often
address this concern by judging the video abstract only on the video’s
technical quality issues, with the scholarly refereeing reserved for the
print article.


Similarly, in these early-adapter days of video abstracts, a gaping
video divide has opened between the physical sciences and the social
sciences and humanities. There’s hardly a sociologist or English
professor to be found summarizing her work on YouTube. After the website
of the Wiley-Blackwell journal History Compass trumpeted the headline “Third video abstract posted!” in February 2011 (see video below), the initiative went dark.



“I’m terribly disappointed that it didn’t get more traction. I think
the potential for the genre is immense,” says Felice Lifshitz, the
journal’s editor and a professor in women’s studies and religious
studies at the University of Alberta.


“The effort never stopped.  All authors who publish in History Compass
are automatically offered the opportunity to post a video abstract of
the essay. But after a few pioneers, no one has wanted to take the
plunge.”


Nonetheless, with thousands of examples worldwide, video abstracts
have emerged as their own YouTube genre. As represented by the first two
demonstration videos on the Canadian Science Publishers website, it has two technical sub-genres, reflecting the mix of marketing and academic communication forces fuelling video abstracts.


The first video demo highlights a study by York University associate
professor Jennifer Kuk on how Canadians estimate serving sizes from the
Canada Food Guide. It’s a two-minute, professionally produced,
news-style clip that would fit seamlessly on a TV newscast. The video is
comparable to Cell Press video abstracts, which numbered more
than 250 at the end of 2012. These pioneering efforts were launched
three years earlier to bolster Elsevier’s flagship journals and are
among the slickest online – the scientific abstract equivalent of music
videos.


Yet it’s the second demonstration video on the Canadian site that
captures the look and feel of most video abstracts, and it remains the
most accessible type for those who want to try making one themselves.
It’s a do-it-yourself, Skype-like video shot in the professor’s office,
the back lighting creating an incandescent halo around her head. She
reads quickly, summarizing the details of the paper, staring at the
camera, at times looking like a deer caught in headlights.


Even though this particular video could act as a demo of technical
errors to avoid (back lighting and reading a text), its focus on a
personalized, unpolished, several minute-long story is the wave of the
future, according to many proponents. It’s the form used by
mathematician Paul Young in the video abstract of his article “Explicit
computation of Gross-Stark units over real quadratic fields” in the Journal of Number Theory.


In the video, Dr. Young sits ocean-side, with a lapping wave
soundtrack. It is extremely simple and has been viewed 469 times, a
decent number and far more viewers than he would expect at a conference
session.



“I made the decision not to write down any formulas at all,” writes
Dr. Young from the College of Charleston, in South Carolina. “This
forced me to reconsider our work and ask myself, ‘How can I convey what
we have accomplished in words only, with no formulas or diagrams?’ More
than once a colleague has remarked, upon viewing the video abstract,
‘Now I see what it is you’ve been up to.’”


It’s this chance to rethink one’s research results in another format
that advocates say is the immediate benefit of creating a video
abstract.


“Any way that you think about a complicated problem along a different
vector, whether it’s writing for the public, talking on YouTube,
teaching [first-year students] or writing a [scientific] paper, each one
is somehow a different intellectual process. And putting those all
together, I think, helps enormously in understanding subjects,” says Dr.
Whitesides of Harvard.


He now has all his students prepare three-minute, abstract-style oral
summaries of their latest research. It’s an assignment similar to the
University of British Columbia’s new Three-Minute Thesis competition or
the compact Pecha Kucha presentations, which limit explanatory slide
shows to 20 images at 20 seconds each. In each initiative, the concise
approach is responding to the web’s double-edge sword – information
overload and the power of brief audio-visual content.


As students research and look for articles on their iPads and
laptops, and as academic journals increasingly move online, publishers
are betting that many more scholars will opt to finish off their
articles, not with a period but with a smile at the camera.


“I believe the video concept is here to stay,” says online editor Dr.
Kuemmerle. “The members of our readership are increasingly comprised of
digital natives and a growing group of digital immigrants. It is a way
for interested learners to interact with journal content in a social
media environment.”



Jacob Berkowitz is a Canadian science journalist whose latest book
is The Stardust Revolution: The New Story of Our Origin in the Stars
(Prometheus Books, 2012).



COMMENTS
Post a comment

University Affairs moderates all
comments according to the following guidelines. If approved, comments
generally appear within one business day. We may republish particularly
insightful remarks in our print edition or elsewhere.


Video abstracts, the latest trend in scientific publishing | University Affairs

Impact Challenge Day 18: Make a video abstract for your research - Impactstory blog

 Source: http://blog.impactstory.org/impact-challenge-video-abstract/


Impact Challenge Day 18: Make a video abstract for your research



Screenshot of Dr. John Mickett explaining his research in the


A screenshot from 'Wavechasers and the Samoan Passage' video abstract
Video abstracts are a great way to explain your work to the public and researchers outside of your field. To paraphrase, they’re like value propositions on steroids.


These 3-5 minute videos allow you to sum up what you’ve
accomplished and documented in a journal article and, crucially, why
it’s important to the world. You can use video abstracts illustrate
concepts and experiments explained in your article, to “introduce
viewers to the equipment and tools you have used in your research and
engage with your audience in a more informal manner,” explains IOP Press.
An increasing number of publishers
are adopting video abstracts as a great way to market research
articles, and in less than an hour you can create one of your own.
In today’s challenge, we’ll walk you through the basics of
creating a video abstract for a journal article: how to write a script,
record the video using common equipment, and share your video to get
maximum visibility for your research.

Step 1. Learn what makes a good video abstract

Here are some award-winning and highly-ranked video abstracts:

  • GBV 5-Minute Science Fair [Public Health & the Pandemic of Violence Against Women]:
    a straightforward video of a researcher describing her study of
    domestic violence among Latino immigrant communities in Washington DC.
    It has good production value–well-lit, easy to hear, plus some custom
    titles and credits added on to the beginning and ending–but is simple
    enough in concept that anyone could pull it off.

  • Dangling-bond charge qubit on a silicon surface:
    in just under five minutes, this video abstract sets a stage for what
    qubits are and why this particular study advances our knowledge of
    qubits. The researchers reuse computer-generated graphics and figures
    from their paper to illustrate the concepts they explain in the video,
    to great effect.

  • The Bacterial Effector VopL Organizes Actin into Filament-like Structures:
    this video features three researchers describing their paper with the
    aid of paper and pen, protein models, and some sweet action shots in the
    lab. It’s a highly technical explanation that can be a bit dry at
    points, but still manages to explain the study in a manner that
    non-specialists like me can understand. It’s successful even without the
    cool footage from the rainforest that the next video boasts, because
    the authors explain things well and go out of their way to illustrate
    concepts for the viewer.

  • Wavechasers & the Samoan Passage:
    an action packed video abstract that seems more like a movie trailer
    than an explanation of geophysics. (“The Wavechasers team travels to
    Samoa (experiencing Samoan culture and hospitality while there) to
    measure an undersea river 5 km beneath the sea surface.”) Setting aside
    the insane production value of the piece, what really drives this video
    abstract is the story behind the research.
So, what makes these video abstracts good?
Wiley explains:
The best video abstracts tend to answer at least two of the questions below:
  • What does your article cover?
  • What are the implications for future research on this topic or where would you like to see the field go?
  • How can an instructor use your article in their teaching?
Viewers need to know how your research is relevant to their
lives, their universe, or the advancement of knowledge in your field.
But you can’t just say anything in your video abstract. Aim
to keep your video simple and short, refrain from using jargon, and–if
possible–tell a story that’ll hook your viewers within the first 30
seconds and keep them watching until the end.
With these principles in mind, let’s get started!

Step 2. Gather your equipment

The basic equipment you’ll need is readily available to many researchers

  • A computer, webcam, and microphone: Many
    newer model laptops now come with webcams and microphones built-in. If
    you don’t have one, try a grad student in your lab or borrow one from a
    colleague. You can also use a desktop computer with a standalone webcam
    and microphone, if need be. And if you plan to do a simple video
    abstract (like the GBV point-and-shoot video featured above), a
    smartphone that can record video will do in a pinch.

  • Video recording software: If you’ve got a late model Macbook, the pre-installed Quicktime Player software can be used to create a simple screencast and iMovie can be used to edit any videos you create. Otherwise, check out Lifehacker’s list of best screencasting software for the top Windows and Mac options.

  • Something interesting to say about your research:
    Video abstracts are only as good as the stories they tell. No amount of
    production value can make up for a dispassionate explanation or lack of
    relatability to the viewer’s own life. In the next step, we’ll share
    some research-backed tips on how to communicate your results, but at the
    very least, you’ll need the kernels of the story from which we’ll make
    this video abstract bloom.
Once you’ve got all that together, it’s time to choose a format and write your script.

Step 3. Choose your format

Do you want to do a point-and-shoot video that’s simply 2 minutes of you describing your paper and why it rocks?
Would you prefer to structure your video abstract like a
lightning-talk screencast, with you explaining slides and videos that
illustrate your points from off-camera?
Or maybe you’ve got an amazing story to go along with your
study, and some buddies in your university’s press office that have a
lot of time and money to help you make a splash with a killer movie
trailer-style video?
The format of the video you’ll create will likely be
dependent upon what equipment and technical expertise you have on hand.
And your script will be dependent upon your video’s format.
So, catalogue what you’ve got available and decide upon a
format. Because we’re getting to the good stuff next: your video’s
script.

Step 4. Write the script

keyboard-498396_1280.jpg
You’ll use your script to narrate the story of your video.
It doesn’t have to be written out, word-for-word; if you’re comfortable
ad libbing, a simple outline will do. But you’ll still need to plan
ahead on what you’re going to say, to some degree.

Create an outline

Your outline should follow a basic structure.
A problem statement
What question was unanswered before you began your
research, and how did that affect the viewer’s life or the advancement
of knowledge in your field? (“We knew that prostate cancer affected
residents of three New York counties at a rate double that of the rest
of the state, but no one knew why.”)
A one-sentence explanation of how your research solves that problem
Using as simple language as possible, describe the results
of your study and what bearing it might have on a solution to the
problem statement. (“After a 30-year study of New York residents and
countless environmental tests on both humans and lab animals, we
discovered that contaminated groundwater was likely the culprit.”) Both
this explanation and the problem statement should fit into the first 30
seconds of your video.
An in-depth explanation of your study and results
Here you can dive into detail, setting up the story of how
you conducted your study–the types of experiments you ran or data you
collected and analyzed–and the specifics of the results you found and
what they might mean. Remember to refrain from using jargon unless
absolutely necessary, and explain any jargon you do use.
Reiterate what the problem is, how you solved it, and why the world’s a better place now
In the final few seconds of the video, you’ll remind the
viewer of the problem your study has solved, and bring it back home to
explain what bearing that has on their life. (“Now that we know that
groundwater contamination resulting from the fracking methods used by
most drillers does indeed cause cancer, we may be able to convince
politicians to ban these methods in the future, so no one else is
affected.”)
Invite the viewer to become a reader
If the viewer’s made it this far into the video, they’re
likely hooked on what you’ve said and want to know more. Use this
opportunity to point them to your journal article or preprint where they
can read the full study.

Build your outline into an engaging script

Once you’ve got a solid outline, you’ll need to decide if writing a full script will be useful for the video.
If you’ve decided to do a point-and-shoot video,
an outline of your talk is probably your best bet. It will keep you on
your main talking points, while avoiding sounding stiff or
over-rehearsed.
Doing a lightning-talk screencast instead?
Use your outline to create a slide deck, and then write out what you’re
going to say, word for word, so you can read it while doing the
screencast.
For a movie trailer abstract, you’ll
definitely want a full script, and you’ll probably want to develop it
with the help of experienced A/V professionals in your university’s
press office.
If you decide to write a full script, keep in mind that 120-150 words roughly translate into a minute of video. You’ll want to keep your video to 3-5 minutes, so plan to write a script that’s 750 words or less.

Step 4. Record your video abstract!

6727657111_29168bef24_z.jpg
CC-BY 2.0 Dave Dugdale
If you’re recording your video abstract for sharing on a publisher’s website, you’ll need to record your video according to their guidelines. Be sure to double-check their limits on the video’s length, quality, and how and where it’s shared.


If you’re creating a point-and-shoot video or a movie
trailer-style abstract, pay close attention to the quality of sound and
lights. Videos that are difficult to watch won’t get many viewers. The University Affairs blog
recommends using “a lapel microphone, ideally, or else a very quiet
room. Ensure that lights are facing the speaker and avoid backlighting,
which happens when you situate the interview subject against a window.”
And if you’re creating a lightning-talk screencast video,
consider paying a professional voiceover artist to narrate it. They can
be easily hired on Fiverr for around $5/minute of voiceover, and often have the experience and audio equipment that’ll make your video sound professionally produced.
If you’d rather do the voiceover yourself, keep Videobrewery’s advice in mind:
Keep dialogue to between 125
and 150 words a minute.  And while you might be able to speak 200 or
more words per minute on your own, keep in mind that the voiceover needs
time to breathe, allowing viewers to absorb what you’re saying (this is
especially true if the content is particularly dense or technical in
nature). Machine gun fire dialogue quickly overwhelms viewers, causing
abandonment and decreased comprehension.
Once your video has been recorded, you can choose to edit
it with your video editing software. This is a good opportunity to
remove your tangents and flubbed lines, but it might require you to
learn a new skill. Sometimes, it’s just easier to record a second take,
instead.
One final option that’ll make your video stand out: add intro and outro music that’s licensed for reuse, which can be hunted down on the Internet Archive for free or purchased cheaply from AudioJungle.
When you’ve finished recording, buy yourself a drink!
You’ve just accomplished a pretty big feat: video-enhanced public
outreach.
Now let’s get your video to the public!

Step 5. Upload the video

Where to share it

Two popular platforms for video sharing are YouTube and
Vimeo. Both can be used to track views and likes for your video, and
allow you to copy-and-paste simple codes to embed your video in other
websites. Neither offer long-term preservation, so you might consider
backing up your video abstract on Figshare or a similar service.
YouTube
YouTube is free and easy to use, but it has its drawbacks: they reserve the right to place ads on and alongside your videos.
Vimeo
Vimeo is also fairly easy to use and offers a well-designed, ad-free viewing interface. Its main drawback is that you have to pay for video uploads greater than 500 MB in size. You can  disable comments and allow viewers to download your video, if you wish.

What to include

When you upload your video, be sure to include a
descriptive title (one that matches your article is ideal), a 2-3
sentence description of your video abstract’s content, and a full
citation to your paper (including a link to a freely-accessible copy of
its fulltext, if it’s been published in a toll-access journal).

Step 6. Promote your awesome new video abstract

Now that your video is online, let’s get it some viewers!
Some good places to share your video on the Web include:
  • On the article homepage: if the journal allows it,
    embed your video next to the written abstract for your paper. That way,
    potential readers get a more engaging glimpse of what your paper’s
    about, beyond what appears in the written abstract.
  • Your website: embed your video on your website’s homepage, or on the Publications or Research pages.
  • Your blog: share the video along with a link to your publication and a transcript of your video, adapted into a blogpost.
  • Twitter and Facebook:
    these social media platforms were practically made for sharing video
    with the public. Share a link with your next update and both platforms
    will automagically embed it for your followers and friends.
  • We Share Science:
    this video aggregator allows you to share your science video abstract
    with other scientists and students. You can also follow other authors
    and video creators on the site to stay on top of the best video
    abstracts–useful for discovering what works well so you can borrow it to
    use in your own videos!

Homework

Choose an article you’ve written and create a video
abstract for it. And once you’ve created it, share it on at least one of
the platforms or websites we mention above.
Tomorrow, we’ll explore how you can turn peer reviews into
an opportunity serve your discipline and build your brand as an expert
in your field.


Impact Challenge Day 18: Make a video abstract for your research - Impactstory blog

Friday, 13 January 2017

SSRN Top Downloads - SSRN Top Downloads For AARN: Illness Case Studies (Sub-Topic)











Impact of Article Page Count and Number of Authors on Citations in Disability Related Fields: A Systematic Review Article













Abubakar Ahmed,






Mastura Adam,






Norafida A. Ghafar,






Murtala Muhammad and






Nader Ale Ebrahim




































































University of Malaya (UM), University of Malaya -
Department of Architecture, University of Malaya (UM), University of
Malaya (UM) and Centre for Research Services, Institute of Management
and Research Services (IPPP), University of Malaya (UM)University of
Malaya (UM) - Department of Engineering Design and Manufacture



Date posted to database: 4 Oct 2016


Last Revised: 4 Oct 2016


SSRN Top Downloads