Open Access to Scholarly Research : An Emerging Success Story in Emancipatory Communication
Open access is defined, and explored in the context of enclosure and emancipatory communication. One attempt at enclosure, in the form of heavy lobbying by very wealthy companies in the publishing industry against research funders' open access mandates, has been exposed. A PR message is traced from the recommendations of PR pitbull Eric Dezenhall to a failed anti-OA coalition attempt called PRISM to the White House. In spite of this intense lobbying, open access is succeeding. Resources are growing dramatically; the Directory of Open Access Journals, a list of fully open access, peer-reviewed journals, lists more than 2,800 journals, more than 10% of the world's peer-reviewed journals, and is adding titles at a rate of more than one per calendar day. There are more than 16 million items in open access archives, retrievable through portals such as Scientific Commons or OAIster. Despite heavy lobbying, the US Senate recently voted heavily in favor of language to change the National Institutes of Health Public Access policy from an ineffective request to a requirement. There are now 40 research funding agencies' open access mandates either in place or under discussion.
The Dramatic Growth of Open Access
Abstract The Open Access movement seeks to make scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles freely available to anyone, anywhere over the World Wide Web. There were some very significant developments in the area of Open Access in 2004, including statements by major fund donors in support of Open Access. There are now so many Open Access scholarly journal articles available, that using the resources and related tools is essential for libraries. Libraries can provide more and faster resources for users by supplementing paid resources with Open Access resources. Library resources, such as software that fixes links, commonly named resolvers, are beginning to incorporate Open Access materials and Web searches for Open Access materials. After exhausting traditional resources, interlibrary loan staff members are beginning to include Google searching in their workflow. This article will discuss what Open Access is, the dramatic growth of Open Access, major collections, resources and tools. The article will explore the implications, issues, and leadership opportunities for resource sharing specialists.
A controlled, randomized trial of highly selective vagotomy versus selective vagotomy and pyloroplasty in the treatment of duodenal ulcer.
The results of highly selective vagotomy without drainage and selective vagotomy with pyloroplasty for duodenal ulcer were compared in a randomized, controlled trial of a series of 100 patients. The frequency of dumping, diarrhoea, and epigastric fullness was significantly lower after highly selective (6, 6, and 8 percent) than after selective vagotomy (30, 20, and 28 percent) one year after the operations. Recurrent and persisting duodenal ulcers appearing from one to four years after the operations were significantly more frequent after highly selective (22 percent) than after selective vagotomy (8 percent). No significant relationships were found between recurrent ulceration and gastric acid secretion measurements after the two operations. The Hollander response was early positive in 28 percent and late positive in 30 percent of the patients subjected to highly selective vagotomy, while the corresponding figures after selective vagotomy were 26 and 32 percent. The overall clinical results of the two operations were not different according to the classification of Visick. Excluding the patients with recurrence resulted in significantly better clinical results after highly selective vagotomy.