This blog is designed around the idea that the impact of any scientific report is primarily determined by the level of interest it triggers. The excitement or despair reading a new scientific paper can cause is only paralleled by the spectacular failure of ‘standard’ publication metrics in reflecting it1.
On biomolbioandco, each author will blog about the papers and manuscripts that caught their attention, independently on any impact, any factor or any journal. A paper might be selected because it represents a milestone in the field, offers the opportunity to reflect on a specific concept, is a piece of science they are particularly proud of, raises concerns or is just cool. More than a collection of papers, biomolbioandco offers a platform for the open discussion of research in the (broadly defined) areas of biochemistry and molecular biology.
biomolbioandco belongs to a more general movement trying to bring scientific discussion out in the open: post-publication review platforms as PubPeer and PubMedCommons are gaining momentum, papers are routinely discussed on twitter, Google+ and blogs, and most journals now allow readers’ comments. biomolbioandco also keeps a close eye on the main preprint servers (arXiv, bioRxiv, PeerJ PrePprints) to provide authors, editors and readers a platform where to discuss results ahead of formal publication (as happened here and here) and foster engagement. Of course, newly published papers, old classics and lost gems are also discussed on biomolbioandco.
biomolbioandco also focuses on issues that do not belong to the lab bench. Topics of particular interest include: open-access policies, alternative impact metrics, new publication models, public and government policies, science and society.