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: "Alf Eaton eaton.alf@xxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 10:02:16 -0000
Thank you Charles, and apologies for re-opening a discussion that had
already concluded.

Alf

On 18 January 2018 at 16:43, Charles O'Connor coconnor@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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