NC3Rs

General queries

What are the advantages of publishing on this gateway?

There are many benefits to publishing on the NC3Rs gateway:

• Fast: Rapid publication means new findings can be shared without delay.
• Transparent: Peer reviewer reports are published alongside the research, supporting recognition of reviewers as well as improving transparency.
• Open: There are no academic editors who make decisions on whether or not to publish a paper, and articles are not judged on perceived novelty.
• Reproducible: The inclusion of citations to supporting data facilitates reanalysis, replication and reuse and thus improves reproducibility of research.
• Impact-focused: The use of research indicators that allow authors and users to gauge the interest, reach, access and use of their research outputs.
• Useful resource: Open access repository for detailed protocols.

What will it cost to publish on this gateway?

The costs for the first 50 articles published on the gateway will be covered directly by the NC3Rs. Thereafter, the costs will fall under the RCUK Open Access Block Grant. F1000Research will provide editorial, production and administrative support to authors throughout the publication and post-publication peer review process.

Does the NC3Rs gateway have an Impact Factor?

No, as part of F1000Research the NC3Rs gateway will not have an Impact Factor. An increasing number of funders and institutions strongly support a move away from a focus on journal-based metrics. The NC3Rs believe in the intrinsic value of research that is important and not in the venue of publication.

How will publications on this gateway be judged by funders and institutions?

A variety of qualitative and quantitative metrics are available for all articles and outputs published on the gateway allowing a view of interest, access, use and re-use of the research (e.g. Altmetrics). Transparent reviewing of all articles will also provide an important additional assessment at the article level, in addition to more traditional measures such as views, downloads and citations.

Aims and scope: What is the NC3Rs gateway?

What is the scope of the NC3Rs gateway?

The NC3Rs gateway is primarily designed to publish method articles describing the science and technology emerging from NC3Rs-funded research in sufficient detail to allow its use by others. The gateway also publishes brief reports and data notes, for sharing smaller pieces of work, registered reports and review articles that summarise the wider context and impact of NC3Rs-funded research.

How many articles are expected, and when is the most appropriate time, to be published on the gateway?

This will be determined on a case-by-case basis. For some grant holders multiple publications and the use of different article types at various timepoints during the grant lifecycle will be appropriate. For others, one publication may be published per grant. This can be discussed with the Office at any time, including during the mid-grant visit with the Programme Manager.

How will publishing on the gateway affect future funding applications made to the NC3Rs?

Track record of the applicants is one of the assessment criteria taken into consideration by the NC3Rs funding assessment panels when reviewing applications submitted for funding. As such, failure to abide by the NC3Rs grant terms and conditions may jeopardise future funding applications to the NC3Rs.

Why is the gateway only open to our grant holders to publish?

This is a new service that has been specifically developed for NC3Rs-funded researchers to promote the 3Rs impact of their work, and publish rapidly any research output they wish to share.

How much involvement will the NC3Rs have in the process?

The NC3Rs aims to support all of our grant holders as much possible. Grant holders must contact the NC3Rs Office prior to submitting an article for publication on the gateway, and can discuss the submission of an article at any time, including during the mid-grant visit with the Programme Manager.

Are grant holders expected to publish on the gateway if the methodology has already been published on another platform?

The NC3Rs experience is that most often our grant holders’ publications describe new findings using a novel approach rather than the approach itself. Therefore, we are not expecting a high level of overlap to occur. Grant holders can discuss this, and any other queries they may have, with the Office at any time including during the mid-grant visit with the Programme Manager.

What level of detail is required to be included within the articles?

Method articles should include enough detail to enable other researchers to adopt the method described in their own lab. There are no word limits, or limits to the number of figures and tables that can be included in articles published on the NC3Rs gateway.

Gateway functionality

What information and media types can be uploaded to the gateway?

All articles should include the underlying raw data, F1000Research-approved repositories support an extensive range of data type such as spreadsheet, images, videos, software source code, imaging, and sequence and omics data (see the data guidelines).

Can videos be uploaded to the gateway?

The NC3Rs gateway allows the inclusion of videos in articles but it does not offer additional services for scripting, shooting and producing the video.

Is the gateway a preprint server?

A preprint server is a repository for pre-publication draft versions of full papers that are often subsequently submitted to journals for peer review and publication. All articles on the NC3Rs gateway are permanently published (with a DOI) and undergo formal peer review after publication. Since peer review starts the moment they are published, they are not preprints and cannot be submitted to other journals, regardless of the peer review outcome.

What article types does NC3Rs gateway publish?

The NC3Rs gateway is primarily designed to publish method articles, but there is also a provision for the publication of review articles, brief reports, data notes and registered reports. For a detailed description of each article type, please see our article guidelines. The gateway welcomes positive, negative or null studies, replication studies and refutation studies equally.

Are there space/word limits or restrictions on articles?

There are no word limits, or limits to the number of figures and tables that can be included. The costs for the first 50 articles published on the gateway will be covered directly by the NC3Rs. Thereafter, the Article Processing Charges will fall under the RCUK Open Access Block Grant and are based on word count.

Open peer review

How does the post-publication peer-review process work?

The NC3Rs gateway operates a formal invited post-publication peer review model, which is fully transparent and open, and is led by the article authors. Reviewers, following certain reviewer criteria, are usually suggested by the authors. Additionally, authors on the NC3Rs gateway will be asked to approve an NC3Rs-nominated reviewer, with 3Rs expertise in their field.

Peer review reports are published alongside the reviewers’ full names and affiliations as soon as they are submitted, and they remain attached to the article if it is indexed with sites such as PubMed and Scopus. Peer review directly determines whether an article will be indexed, via the approval status that reviewers select when reviewing the article.

If you’ve been invited to review an article and would like more information on the model, please visit the ‘How it Works’ page.

Why undertake post-publication open peer review?

There are many good reasons for being open about reviewer identities and comments.

First: We believe that secret peer reviewing, where authors do not know who has reviewed their work and reviewers do not have to publicly stand by their comments, opens up the possibility of bias. Reviewers who review work that competes with their own may be tempted to unfairly criticise or delay its publication.

Second: Peer review reports can be interesting and informative and we believe that everyone should have a chance to see them. At their best, they offer an objective critique that adds real value to the article in question for authors and readers alike. It is also interesting to see the range of positive, negative and neutral reviews some papers receive, which often reflects the real breadth of expert opinion in controversial and cutting-edge areas of science.

Third: If peer review reports are kept secret, reviewers get no credit for their contributions. They devote an immense amount of time and effort to reviewing other scientists' work and advising them on how to improve it, and it is fair that this should be recognized and acknowledged.

Finally, publicly accessible, signed reports tend to be better written and more constructive than anonymous, behind-the-scenes reviews. This has also been shown in randomised controlled trials. So the act of publishing the reports actually improves the quality of advice the authors receive.

What if a reviewer says something negative about my article and everyone can see it?

Constructive criticism is a core part of a reviewer's job, so peer review reports often contain suggestions for improvements or insights into a paper's weaknesses. Our reviewers' reports are no different in this regard. What does make the NC3Rs gateway different is that you can respond to reviewers, to clarify and explain. And if a reviewer points out errors or omissions in your paper, or suggests ways to improve it, you can publish a revised version that addresses these issues. One of the benefits of the NC3Rs gateway is that you can also see other people's reviews, and you will notice that constructive criticism is common in many peer review reports.

Who can comment on my work?

Unsolicited, open scientific discussion on all articles is encouraged. Such contributions are published through the Comment system, and according to F1000Research policies, anyone who wishes to comment on an article will be asked to declare any competing interests, along with their full name and affiliation.

While open scientific debate and discussion is welcomed, abusive behaviour towards authors and reviewers via the Comment system or via social media will not be tolerated. In extreme cases, contacting the affiliated institution to report the abusive behaviour of individuals will be considered.