Home
FAQs
faqs
FAQs
General Questions
What is HRB Open Research?
HRB Open Research provides Health Research Board researchers with a place to rapidly publish their research outputs followed by an independent, invited open peer review. Combined with an Open Data policy, the platform supports research integrity, reproducibility and transparency.
How does HRB Open Research work?
Health Research Board researchers can publish any research outputs they wish to share including standard research papers, data sets, new insights and irrespective whether the findings are positive, negative, unexpected or controversial. HRB Open Research will use the same model that has been established for F1000Research and Wellcome Open Research.
Why are the Health Research Board doing this?
In line with the broader European shift towards open science and more transparent publishing models, the Health Research Board want the research they fund to be open, accessible and usable, so it can have the greatest possible impact. HRB Open Research directly supports the HRB Open Access policy and data sharing initiatives.
Is the HRB Open Research platform fully controlled by Health Research Board and independent of any specific provider?
The Health Research Board controls the HRB Open Research platform. The Health Research Board ran a competitive, open public procurement exercise to appoint a service provider.
Why is the platform only open to Health Research Board grantholders and people working on Health Research Board-funded/co-funded grants?
This is a new service that has been specifically developed for Health Research Board-funded researchers to help us to examine the benefits of open publishing.
What are the advantages of publishing in HRB Open Research?
There are many benefits to publishing on HRB Open Research, even over other open access journals:
- Fast: Rapid publication means new findings can be shared without any delay.
- Inclusive: Supports the publication of a wide range of outputs - from standard research papers, to data sets, from new insights and findings whether confirmatory or negative.
- Value: The costs of publishing are covered by the HRB.
- Transparent: Peer reviewer reports are published alongside the research, supporting recognition of reviewers as well as improving transparency.
- Open: Authors, not editors, decide when to publish and what to publish.
- Reproducible: The inclusion of supporting data facilitates reanalysis, replication and reuse and thus improves reproducibility of research.
- Impact-focused: The use of research indicators allow authors and users to gauge the interest, reach, access and use of their research outputs.
What types of researchers will benefit from publishing in HRB Open Research?
This platform will benefit researchers at all stages of their careers. Being able to publish in open access as well as tracking page hits, views, downloads and citations are important metrics for all. Researchers will also save money by publishing in HRB Open Research as the existing high costs of publishing are not applicable.
For early stage researchers, the platform is ideal to begin publishing outputs and building a strong reputation in research as well as being supportive and aware of the move to open publishing models. For more senior researchers, HRB Open Research presents the opportunity to publish data which may support already existing publications.
For early stage researchers, the platform is ideal to begin publishing outputs and building a strong reputation in research as well as being supportive and aware of the move to open publishing models. For more senior researchers, HRB Open Research presents the opportunity to publish data which may support already existing publications.
Will publishing on HRB Open Research, or providing peer review on this platform, increase a Health Research Board researcher’s chance of receiving future Health Research Board funding?
Neither instance will increase the chance of a Health Research Board researcher receiving additional funding. HRB Open Research publications submitted as part of a funding application will be evaluated on the intrinsic merit of the work. The Health Research Board provides clear, transparent details of criteria used in evaluating Health Research Board grant applicants for its various schemes. The Health Research Board recognises that research produces outputs other than journal articles and supports an enriched and informed process of evaluation, and responsible use of existing metrics.
Does HRB Open Research have an Impact Factor?
No, HRB Open Research does 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 Health Research Board believe it is the intrinsic value of research that is important and not the venue of publication. It is our expectation that HRB Open Research will help shift the focus in scientific publishing to practices that incentivize, recognize and reward good research. To support the introduction of HRB Open Research the Health Research Board added their signatory to the San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment (DORA).
What article-level metrics are available?
Individual articles will display article-level metrics as and when applicable, such as Altmetrics; PubMed citations for articles that have passed peer review; and the number of views and PDF downloads on HRB Open Research and in PubMed Central.
How will funders and research institutions evaluate outputs published on HRB Open Research?
A variety of qualitative and quantitative metrics are available for all articles published on the platform 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.
What will it cost to publish on this platform?
Articles published on this platform will incur Article Processing Charges (APC) dependent on the article type. These costs will be covered directly by the Health Research Board, there is no charge to the author.
Do you offer copyediting support?
Occasionally, we may recommend that an article is copyedited before our editors proceed further with the article – either by a native English speaker or a professional copyediting search. Whilst HRB Open Research does not offer this level of language editing, we have compiled a list of copyediting services you may wish to consider. Please note that these companies are independent from HRB Open Research, and we are not able to guarantee the quality of their services.
Does the platform have an API to allow the content to be downloaded?
Yes, The API allows anyone to download the XML and PDF of specific articles as well as to download links to the XML of the entire corpus of articles. Please contact us for instructions on use.
Aims and scope – what is HRB Open Research?
Is HRB Open Research a preprint server?
No, while HRB Open Research is like a preprint server as authors can rapidly publish anything they wish to share, there is an important difference in that publication is automatically followed by invited, independent and transparent peer review. Once the platform has been formally approved by bibliographic databases, articles that pass peer review will be indexed there. Publications on HRB Open Research cannot be submitted elsewhere.
Are all articles in HRB Open Research ‘published’, even if they have not been peer reviewed?
Yes, all articles are published and can be viewed on the HRB Open Research platform irrespective of the peer review status. Once the platform has been formally approved by bibliographic databases, only articles that pass peer review will be subsequently indexed there. Traditional journals peer review and then publish; we publish and then peer review.
What is HRB Open Research’s scope?
HRB Open Research publishes different article types across a wide range of scientific, academic, and clinical disciplines funded or co-funded by the Health Research Board.
It publishes original research on all topics that receive grant funding from the Health Research Board. This includes:
It publishes original research on all topics that receive grant funding from the Health Research Board. This includes:
- Exploratory research
- Translational research
- Applied biomedical research
- Clinical studies
- Epidemiologic studies
- Health services research
- Population health sciences research
- Humanities and social sciences research
What research does this platform publish?
Health Research Board researchers can use the platform to publish standard research articles, clinical trial findings, systematic reviews, study protocols, data notes, negative/null results, case reports and many other original submissions.
Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all Health Research Board grantholders or people working on a Health Research Board-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Publications from this group of researchers may include research outputs that were not directly funded as part of a HRB grant.
Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all Health Research Board grantholders or people working on a Health Research Board-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Publications from this group of researchers may include research outputs that were not directly funded as part of a HRB grant.
Does HRB Open Research affect my H-index?
Your H-index should not be diluted by HRB Open Research. All versions of an article receive a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and all citations are collated into a single entry rather than each version being counted separately. For instance, if an author published an article and revised it 4 times, that article should only have one entry to the H-index which includes citations of all 4 versions.
How do readers find my research?
Research published on HRB Open Research is visible on the HRB Open Research platform and can be shared and cited immediately (i.e. research will have a DOI). Articles are also immediately indexed in Google Scholar. Once the platform has been formally approved by bibliographic databases such as PubMed, articles that pass peer review (i.e. have received at least two Approved peer review reports, or one approved plus two approved with reservations reviews) will be indexed there. All publications have prominence on the HRB Open Research platform, and through ease of access to the online system publications receive maximum opportunity for dissemination.
Authorship
How should authorship contributions be listed?
We are using the CRediT taxonomy to capture author contributions as we believe that having more detail of who did what brings transparency, enables recognition for researchers, and provides greater accountability for all involved. Upon submission you will be asked to select from a 14-item list, all the contributions made by each author. For more information, click here.
What happens if the author list changes in a new version of the same article?
If the author list of an article changes following its publication, a new version of the article can be published, with an explanation included in the ‘Amendments’ section at the top of the new version. As each version of an article has its own DOI, these can be individually cited and accessed. Therefore, the authorship list can change without affecting earlier versions of the article. The authorship contributions must also be revised accordingly.
Any changes in authorship must be confirmed by all authors in writing or over email, and the corresponding author is responsible for obtaining this confirmation from their co-authors. The Health Research Board team may also contact any co-authors directly to obtain this confirmation.
Who should I include in the Acknowledgments section?
Anyone who has contributed to the study but does not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments section. It is the authors responsibility to obtain permission to include the name and affiliation, from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgments section. Please note that grant funding should not be listed here.
How does open invited peer review of articles after publication work?
How does the publishing model work?
HRB Open Research enables authors to control the publication process themselves: submitted articles and their accompanying source data are published after a rapid set of objective checks, ensuring that basic scholarly publication policies and standards are adhered to.
Following a conflict-of-interest check, the published articles then undergo invited, independent and transparent peer review (reviewer names and the reviewer report are published alongside the article). Authors can then revise and update their articles following receipt of peer-review comments.
Once the platform has been formally approved by bibliographic databases, articles that pass peer review (i.e. have received at least two Approved peer review reports, or one approved plus two approved with reservations reviews) will be indexed there. HRB Open Research will use the F1000Research model, which is also used by Wellcome Open Research.
Following a conflict-of-interest check, the published articles then undergo invited, independent and transparent peer review (reviewer names and the reviewer report are published alongside the article). Authors can then revise and update their articles following receipt of peer-review comments.
Once the platform has been formally approved by bibliographic databases, articles that pass peer review (i.e. have received at least two Approved peer review reports, or one approved plus two approved with reservations reviews) will be indexed there. HRB Open Research will use the F1000Research model, which is also used by Wellcome Open Research.
Why publish before peer review?
Conducting peer review after publication removes the delay for others who can benefit from accessing the work during the reviewing period. Closed review processes typically take many months. HRB Open Research removes the possibility of an article being blocked or held up by a single editor or reviewer. It also allows other researchers in the field to judge the work for themselves and start building upon it, perhaps repeating the analysis for themselves, while expert reviewers assess it.
Are submissions checked for quality before they are published?
Articles are checked by our in-house editorial team (provided by F1000Research) who ensure that each submitted article is (co-)authored by a Health Research Board-funded researcher and is appropriate in terms of scope and format and that the writing is comprehensible. We also check that article submissions are complete, not plagiarized, and that they meet ethical standards. Finally, we support authors by making sure that citations to all supporting data are included with the article, that the methods section contains adequate protocol information to make the data useful, and that all requirements in our article guidelines are met.
Why are there several versions of the same article?
As peer review takes place after publication, authors can submit a new version of their article that addresses any concerns or shortcomings that were identified during the peer-review process. Once a new version of an article is published, the reviewers are asked to re-review the article and check whether their concerns have been addressed.
All versions of an article are accessible, each with their own DOI (digital object identifier) and may be cited individually. The most recent article version is displayed as the default, and older article versions display a clear notification that newer versions are available.
All versions of an article are accessible, each with their own DOI (digital object identifier) and may be cited individually. The most recent article version is displayed as the default, and older article versions display a clear notification that newer versions are available.
What if I cite an article and a new version is published afterwards?
All versions of every article are retained and are accessible to readers, but if you visit an older version of an article, for example via a citation, a message will appear on-screen to alert you that there is a newer version available. If you have stored a version of the article's PDF in a reference manager or on your computer, you can ensure it is the most recent version by using the CrossMark button: when you click it you will be able to see immediately if newer versions of the article are available.
Is ‘Awaiting peer review’ equivalent to ‘Submitted’ in other journals?
No - articles awaiting peer review in HRB Open Research are officially published. You can cite papers that are awaiting peer review (for example in manuscripts, CVs, or grant applications), because the citation includes details of the peer review status, making it clear to everyone what stage of peer review the article has reached. Readers who later follow the citation link to view the paper will be able to see its current peer review status.
Are the review statuses ‘Approved’, ‘Approved with Reservations’, and ‘Not Approved’ equivalent to terms used when Editors make decisions on traditional journals (‘Accepted’, Minor/Major Revisions’, and Rejected’)?
Not quite - most importantly, 'Not Approved' does not mean 'Rejected'. It simply means that the reviewer considers the current version of the article not to be of a high enough standard; they may have identified some flaws that seriously undermine the results and conclusions, unless they are fixed. The article remains published and a future revised version, if the reviewers judge it to be sufficiently improved, may then be given an 'Approved' or 'Approved with Reservations'.
The term 'Approved' means that the reviewer considers the article to be technically sound, and has either no or only minor revisions.
'Approved with Reservations' means that the reviewer believes the paper has academic merit, but has asked for a number of small changes to the article, or specific, sometimes more significant revisions.
In every case, even when all reviewers approve the article, future versions are welcome.
The term 'Approved' means that the reviewer considers the article to be technically sound, and has either no or only minor revisions.
'Approved with Reservations' means that the reviewer believes the paper has academic merit, but has asked for a number of small changes to the article, or specific, sometimes more significant revisions.
In every case, even when all reviewers approve the article, future versions are welcome.
Why did the definition of ‘Approved with Reservations’ change?
In June 2020, the 'Approved with Reservations' definition was altered from: “The article is not fully technically sound in its current version, but the reviewer's criticisms could be addressed with specific, sometimes major, revisions” to “the reviewer believes the paper has academic merit, but has asked for a number of small changes to the article, or specific, sometimes more significant revisions”.
This change was made both to better reflect the scope of articles published, and in response to feedback from our authors and reviewers that the distinctions between statuses needed to be more defined. To ensure that all articles receive a fair and transparent peer review, and to prevent reviewers' previous decisions being affected, this change only applies to articles published after June 2020.
This change was made both to better reflect the scope of articles published, and in response to feedback from our authors and reviewers that the distinctions between statuses needed to be more defined. To ensure that all articles receive a fair and transparent peer review, and to prevent reviewers' previous decisions being affected, this change only applies to articles published after June 2020.
Is the new version of my article a revision or an update?
New articles versions are considered to be revisions when they incorporate amendments in response to peer review comments; publication of revised versions is always free of charge. Versions are considered to be updates when the authors wish to add small developments or new information to the article, usually after it has passed peer review.
What happens if I submit my article to HRB Open Research and it does not pass peer review or does not secure 2 peer reviews?
While HRB Open Research operates an ‘author led’ model, there is a team available to help and advise on papers where peer review reports are lacking. To assist authors in identifying suitable reviewers, authors can also use our Reviewer Finder Tool. Our algorithm analyses the submission and provides a ranked list of reviewer candidates based on leading authors of related published studies.
Where a paper fails peer review, it remains published and as such cannot be submitted to another journal for publication. The authors have the option of revising their article as well as inviting more reviewers.
Where a paper fails peer review, it remains published and as such cannot be submitted to another journal for publication. The authors have the option of revising their article as well as inviting more reviewers.
When can I revise my article?
You can revise your article at any time by publishing a new version, which will be displayed as the default. There are no extra APC charges for publishing a revised version of your article, and we would encourage you to revise your article in response to peer review reports. If we are expecting further peer review reports to be submitted in the near future, we may sometimes recommend that you wait until the reports are published. However, as our publishing process is entirely driven by the authors, it is your decision when you feel the time is right for a revision.
How can I revise or update my article?
To submit a revised or updated version of your article, you must be signed into the submitting author’s HRB Open Research account. Please download the document provided on the Submissions page and ensure that track changes are turned on whilst editing the document. More information on how to create a new version, please visit Article Guidelines (new versions).
Can I withdraw my article after it has been published?
No, you can’t. Once your article has been published on HRB Open Research, it has a formal citation with a DOI, which means that we must retain a permanent record of the full content and not change or remove it. If you would like to change your article, you can publish a new version; this way, someone looking for your original article will be automatically redirected to the new and revised version. Obviously, if you discover there is something seriously wrong with the whole paper, such as your samples getting mixed up or the key results were generated using a faulty reagent, you can ask us to mark the article as “retracted” and add a note explaining what happened. See details of our correction, replacement, and retraction policies.
Can findings be published in HRB Open Research AND be published in traditional journals?
No, HRB Open Research has the same publishing rules as a traditional journal, in that once research is published here that paper/output cannot be submitted elsewhere.
Open peer review – how does this work at HRB Open Research?
Does open peer review mean that everyone can see the reviewers’ names and comments?
Yes - we name our reviewers and publish their reports alongside the article. Everyone visiting an article page or viewing its PDF can see all peer review reports, reviewer names, and comments.
Why does HRB Open Research publish the peer review reports?
There are many good reasons for being open about reviewer identities and comments.
First: We believe that secret peer reviewing, where authors don't know who has reviewed their work and reviewers don't 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 criticize 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 reviews some papers receive – positive, negative and neutral – 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.
And 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 randomized controlled trials. So the act of publishing the reports actually improves the quality of the advice the authors receive.
First: We believe that secret peer reviewing, where authors don't know who has reviewed their work and reviewers don't 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 criticize 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 reviews some papers receive – positive, negative and neutral – 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.
And 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 randomized controlled trials. So the act of publishing the reports actually improves the quality of the 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 peer review reports are no different in this regard. What makes HRB Open Research different is that you can respond to your 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.
What happens to papers that only receive negative reviews?
Peer reviewers are asked to focus on whether the presented research has academic merit and presented in sufficient detail for others to reproduce, not on the extent of novelty or interest. As experts in the field, the reviewers might judge a published article to not be sound science, or to require significant changes before it can be considered sound. Consequently, on rare occasions, some published papers may be unanimously negatively reviewed.
However, the article is never ‘rejected’ and authors are able to submit a revised version of their article that addresses the reviewers' criticisms; there are no time constraints imposed by an editor, so if extensive revisions are required, authors can spend as much time as needed to address any issues. Authors can at any point defend their work with a comment that is posted in response to the critical reviewer(s).
If authors feel that a reviewer has been unfairly negative about their work, they can also request a new reviewer on either the original version or any revised version of their article. If the authors feel that multiple reviewers have been unfairly negative they should contact editorial@hrbopenresearch.org to discuss their concerns, to ensure that the peer review process remains unbiased.
However, the article is never ‘rejected’ and authors are able to submit a revised version of their article that addresses the reviewers' criticisms; there are no time constraints imposed by an editor, so if extensive revisions are required, authors can spend as much time as needed to address any issues. Authors can at any point defend their work with a comment that is posted in response to the critical reviewer(s).
If authors feel that a reviewer has been unfairly negative about their work, they can also request a new reviewer on either the original version or any revised version of their article. If the authors feel that multiple reviewers have been unfairly negative they should contact editorial@hrbopenresearch.org to discuss their concerns, to ensure that the peer review process remains unbiased.
Who selects the reviewers for articles?
Reviewers are formally invited by the HRB Open Research editorial team (as is the case with most journals). The editorial team are primarily responsible for identifying suitable reviewers; however, the authors are welcome to suggest additional reviewers if they wish- all reviewers, including those from authors, are checked to ensure they are suitable to review before they are invited to contribute a report. Prospective reviewers who have collaborated or are currently collaborating with any of the authors are not eligible to review the article in question. Reviewers are also asked to declare any competing interests.
Who contacts the reviewers?
The HRB Open Research team administers the peer-review process on behalf of the authors. We contact the reviewers and assist them during the peer review. We ask that authors do not contact the reviewers directly as this can influence the objectivity of their reviews.
How do I know if an article has passed peer review?
The peer review status of an article is clearly indicated at all stages:
- Immediately on publication, and until the first peer review report is published, the article is labelled as AWAITING PEER REVIEW - as part of the article title and in the Open Peer Review summary box within the article HTML and PDF.
- As soon as a peer review report is published alongside the article, the current approval status is displayed. As additional reports are received, the approval status is updated.
- Once HRB Open Research has been approved by bibliographic databases, articles that receive two ‘Approved’ statuses, or two ‘Approved with Reservations’ statuses and one ‘Approved’ status, will be indexed there.
Can I promote my article before it has been peer reviewed?
Please avoid promoting articles in the media until the article has passed the open peer review process. Promotion on social media is encouraged once the article has been published; please ensure the full citation is included, as this contains the approval status. HRB Open Research should be cited as the source of these articles with a link to the article.
Who can comment on my work?
We encourage unsolicited open scientific discussion on all articles. Such contributions are published through our Comment system, and according to our 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 we welcome open scientific debate and discussion, we will not tolerate abusive behavior towards our authors and reviewers via our Comment system or via social media. In extreme cases we will consider contacting the affiliated institution to report the abusive behavior of individuals.
While we welcome open scientific debate and discussion, we will not tolerate abusive behavior towards our authors and reviewers via our Comment system or via social media. In extreme cases we will consider contacting the affiliated institution to report the abusive behavior of individuals.
Indexing
Where will my article be indexed?
Articles will appear in Google Scholar. Once an article has passed peer review, i.e. it has received at least two ‘Approved’ statuses, or one ‘Approved’ and two ‘Approved with Reservations’ statuses from independent and invited peer reviewers, it will be indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, Europe PMC, British Library, Crossref and DOAJ. If an article is indexed, all versions, along with the peer review reports, are deposited.
What is HRB Open Research’s backup/archiving strategy?
All articles that pass peer review are archived in the British Library; all our articles at any stage of peer review are also indexed by Portico. Data and code associated with articles are only stored in repositories that we have approved based on (among other things) their archiving policies.
Source data in articles
Why do I have to deposit all the underlying data associated with my article in a repository?
HRB Open Research asks you to deposit your data with an approved repository so that other researchers can analyze and use it, and so they can try to reproduce your results. There are many different types of easy-to-use data repositories available to researchers; please see our data preparation guidelines for a non-exhaustive list of recommended repositories. Exceptions can only be made in very specific circumstances where there are issues with regards to data protection or security risks, and where the data cannot be suitably anonymised.
Which repositories do you accept for hosting of my data?
If there is a subject-specific repository for the type of data you are submitting, we ask that you deposit the data there. For more information about suitable repositories and preparing and hosting of data, please see our data preparation guidelines. For anything else, please contact us and we’ll be happy to advise on the best way to make your data available.
What kind of license do you require for my data?
We recommend the use of the CC0 (Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication) license for any datasets that are made available with your HRB Open Research article.
Do I have to provide my data if there is a patient- or security-sensitive information in it?
Data should be anonymized adequately to address all security or patient confidentiality issues (for example, using the HIPAA Privacy Rule's De-Identification Standard). Otherwise, individuals must have given explicit written consent that their identifiable data can be made publicly available. In some cases, data can be stored in an access-controlled database and all researchers who meet the necessary criteria be given access to review the data on request.
How much data do I have to make available with my article?
There is no easy answer to this question; it all depends on the types of experiments involved. The overarching rule is that there should be enough data provided that another researcher could reanalyse and/or try to reproduce your study. If you are unsure, please contact the HRB Open Research team and we will offer guidance.
How to cite articles, datasets and peer review reports
How do I cite an article published on HRB Open Research?
We have adapted the traditional system of article citation to include two additional elements - the article version number and the number of peer review reports that have received 'Approved', 'Approved with Reservations' or 'Not Approved' statuses. This information is placed in square brackets immediately after the article title to avoid it being accidentally removed on copying. All articles are assigned a DOI (digital object identifier). An article should be cited like this:
Authors. Article title [version number; details of peer review status]. HRB Open Res YEAR, volume:publication number (doi).
The full citation for an article can be obtained by clicking the Cite button on the article page (next to the Abstract).
Authors. Article title [version number; details of peer review status]. HRB Open Res YEAR, volume:publication number (doi).
The full citation for an article can be obtained by clicking the Cite button on the article page (next to the Abstract).
How do I cite a peer review report published in HRB Open Research?
All peer review reports associated with HRB Open Research articles are assigned a DOI (digital object identifier) on publication. This means that they can be cited independently from the article. The full citation for a peer review report can be obtained by clicking the Cite button next to the peer review report. The correct format for a peer review report citation is:
Reviewer name(s). Peer review Report For: Article title [version number; details of peer review status]. HRB Open Res YEAR, volume:publication number (doi)
Reviewer name(s). Peer review Report For: Article title [version number; details of peer review status]. HRB Open Res YEAR, volume:publication number (doi)
How can I cite a dataset?
Source datasets associated with HRB Open Research articles are deposited in repositories that meet certain criteria. Articles include a "Data Availability" section outlining where the source data can be found, including the permanent identifier the dataset(s) have been assigned by the repository and a reference with details of how to cite the dataset(s).
Licenses and copyright
HRB Open Research is Open Access; which licenses are used for publishing?
HRB Open Research articles are usually published under a CC-BY license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and leaves the copyright of the article with the current copyright holder (usually the author or their institution). As the specific version of the CC-BY license applied may change due to periodic updates, the copyright information is shown below the abstract.
What licenses are used for peer review reports?
All peer review reports for articles on HRB Open Research are published under a CC-BY license, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The copyright remains with the current copyright holder (usually the reviewers or their institution). To ensure that copyright and licensing information is accurate, each peer review report has a ‘Copyright information’ section published alongside it.
Expanding your ORCID profile
How do I add my article to my ORCID profile?
HRB Open Research supports the ORCID initiative, which provides every researcher with a unique digital identifier. We are keen to see it adopted on a wider scale and we encourage the use of ORCID IDs amongst our authors. Submitting authors are asked to connect their ORCID iD at the point of submission. When the work is published, co-authors are encouraged to connect their iD and all are reminded to add the article to their ORCID account. Additionally, any registered user can connect their iD at any time, via the My pages.
Can I add my peer review report to my ORCID profile?
We have been working with ORCID and CASRAI so that peer review reports can be integrated into ORCID profiles, enabling reviewers to receive full credit for the input they’ve provided. When your peer review report is published, you will be sent a link via email that will enable you to easily add this report to your ORCID profile.
Will my ORCID profile auto-update?
Yes, once you have connected your ORCID iD to HRB Open Research, all work that is published with you named as an author, whether an article or a peer review report, will automatically be added to your ORCID account.
Contact
HRB Open Research is controlled by the Health Research Board Ireland using services provided by F1000Research.
Editorial enquiries
For enquiries about scope and status of submissions including peer review:
HRBO-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk General enquiries
For general enquiries or support requests:
info@hrbopenresearch.org Media enquiries
Email: info@hrbopenresearch.org
Production enquiries
Email: production@hrbopenresearch.org Enquiries about Open Access at HRB
Email: openaccess@hrb.ie
For enquiries about scope and status of submissions including peer review:
HRBO-peerreview@journals.tandf.co.uk General enquiries
For general enquiries or support requests:
info@hrbopenresearch.org Media enquiries
Email: info@hrbopenresearch.org
Production enquiries
Email: production@hrbopenresearch.org Enquiries about Open Access at HRB
Email: openaccess@hrb.ie