Re: [jats-list] JATS4R draft recommendation for Conflict of Interest statements now open

Subject: Re: [jats-list] JATS4R draft recommendation for Conflict of Interest statements now open
From: "Christina Von Raesfeld tvonraesfeld@xxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 22:29:55 -0000
Hi Charles,


You indicated below that "the model for fn-type is CDATA, so both "conflict"
and "COI-statement" would be valid in JATS 1.1 (blue)".


Wanted to chime in that in the Blue DTD, it appears overrides are defined in
JATS-journalpubcustom-models1.ent that restrict fn-type to the enumerated
list.


Using @fn-type="COI-statement" in JATS 1.1 (blue) produces this error:


Schema: http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd
Engine name: Xerces
Severity: error
Description: Attribute "fn-type" with value "COI-statement" must have a value
from the list "abbr com con conflict corresp current-aff deceased edited-by
equal financial-disclosure on-leave participating-researchers presented-at
presented-by present-address previously-at study-group-members
supplementary-material supported-by other ".


Cheers,

Tina von Raesfeld


PLOS I OPEN FOR DISCOVERY

Tina von Raesfeld I Production Technical Lead

1160 Battery Street, Suite 225, San Francisco, CA 94111

tvonraesfeld@xxxxxxxx<mailto:tvonraesfeld@xxxxxxxx> I Main +1 415-624-1200 I
Direct +1 530-588-2603 I Fax +1 415-546-4090

plos.org<http://www.plos.org/> I Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/PLoS.org> I
Twitter<http://twitter.com/PLOS> I Blog<http://blogs.plos.org/>


________________________________
From: Charles O'Connor coconnor@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 8:43 AM
To: jats-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [jats-list] JATS4R draft recommendation for Conflict of Interest
statements now open

There was a discussion of this topic on the Google doc while it was open. This
is the last thread I have. I don't know how or whether it was resolved (see
below).



Two clarifications about comments in this thread: 1) the model for fn-type is
CDATA, so both "conflict" and "COI-statement" would be valid in JATS 1.1
(blue). 2) The PMC recommendation for JATS 1.1 is to use "conflict" in Blue
and "COI-statement" in Green. I have no information on the reasoning behind
the difference.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmcdoc/tagging-guidelines/article/tags.html#
el-fn



-Charles (AKA Joebob Jones)



*****************************************************************************
***************************************************************



Christina Von Raesfeld replied to a comment on Conflict of Interest Statements
- Draft Recommendation.docx

________________________________________________________________

Joebob Jones

statement

Why "COI-statement" as the value? The JATS tag library recommends "conflict"
for conflict of interest statements, and I know many publishers use
"conflict". Are there also many who currently use "COI-statement"? If not,
then this would create a split with much legacy XML that would otherwise
already conform to this recommendation.

________________________________________________________________

 Luciano Panepucci

I agree. We have been using "conflict" as suggested in JATS[1].



I just checked the PMC tagging guidelines and to my surprise it specifies
"COI-statement"[2]. I wander when was this changed or was it always like this?
(couldn't find in the update history)



[1]
https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/tag-library/1.1/attribute/fn-type.html



[2]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmcdoc/tagging-guidelines/article/tags.html#
el-aunotes



________________________________________________________________

Christina Von Raesfeld

@fn-type="COI-statement" is invalid in the JATS Journal Publishing (Blue) DTD.
We use @fn-type="conflict", and PMC does dictate @fn-type="conflict" for the
Blue DTD:



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmcdoc/tagging-guidelines/article/dobs.html#
dob-coi



"For a COI statement captured as <fn> in the Journal Publishing (Blue) DTD,
use @fn-type="conflict". Otherwise, use the appropriate content type attribute
with a value "COI-statement"."



Also, we do not include the "Competing interests:" label in the footnote and
instead rely on both our and PMC's software to render a "Competing Interests:"
label in front of all @fn-type="conflict" footnotes. If you include the label
in the fn/p, as shown in the JATS4R examples, then it will result in a double
label in the PMC rendering.



*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************

-----Original Message-----

From: Alf Eaton eaton.alf@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 5:50 AM

To: jats-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: Re: [jats-list] JATS4R draft recommendation for Conflict of Interest
statements now open



On 7 December 2017 at 18:24, Kelly McDougall kmcdouga@xxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>

> Hello JATS users,

>

> JATS4R working group has developed a draft recommendation for the tagging of
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interest statements. This
recommendation is open for comment. Please make comments on  the google doc
version
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tJltI28KpqUqI5_c2RH5470RnTdb63yaMYQ6_Moh
qDU/edit?usp=sharing>, which is publicly available. The deadline for adding
comments is Friday, January 5th, 2018.

>

>

> All the best,

>

> Kelly McDougall

>

> JATS4R Standing Committee





If it's not too late (the doc no longer allows comments, so it may be, but I
only just saw this note), I'd like to point out that the JATS documentation
already includes an example of marking up "conflicts of interest" statements
with `fn-type="conflict"`:

https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/tag-library/1.1d1/n-hxx0.html



This can be used in article XML as follows:



<fn-group content-type="competing-interests">

    <title>Competing Interests</title>

    <fn id="conflict-1" fn-type="conflict">

        <p>The authors declare there are no competing interests.</p>

    </fn>

</fn-group>



e.g. https://peerj.com/articles/3000.xml



Alf

Current Thread