The PIRUS Projectobjectives, outcomes and next steps

Gary Van Overborg

Scholarly iQ

The PIRUS project has been funded by JISC. the UK Joint Information Systems Committee

PIRUS: why now?

Increasing interest in article-level usage

Journal articles are now available in a range of locations: The main journal website Aggregator sites ( OVID, ProQuest, etc) Subject repositories ( PubMed Central, etc) Institutional Repositories

Authors and funding agencies are increasingly interested in a reliable, global overview of usage of individual articles

Online usage becoming an alternative, accepted measure of article and journal value

PIRUS: why now?

Article-level usage metrics now more practical

Implementation by COUNTER of XML-based usage reports makes more granular reporting of usage a practical proposition

Implementation by COUNTER of the SUSHI protocol facilitates the automated consolidation of usage data from different sources.

PIRUS: support for the principle of reporting article-level usage

Authors: very positive. Evidence from PLoS experience and growing numbers of requests to other publishers for individual article usage reports

Publishers: support growing, as they receive more requests from authors for usage data on individual articles.

Repositories: mixed. Some question the need for a global standard. Others are concerned about costs.

Research institutions: positive. Interested in measures of the value and impact of research outputs

PIRUS: benefits

Reliable usage data will be available for journal articles, wherever they are held

Repositories will have access to new functionality from open source software that will allow them to produce standardised usage reports from their data

Publishers will be able to provide their authors with more reliable usage statistics

The authoritative status of PIRUS usage statistics will enhance the status of article-level usage reports

The standard can be extended to cover other categories of content stored by repositories

PIRUS: mission and project aims

MissionTo develop a global standard to enable the recording, reporting and

consolidation of online usage statistics for individual journal articles hosted by Institutional Repositories, Publishers and other entities

Project aims Develop COUNTER-compliant usage reports at the individual

article level

Create guidelines which, if implemented, would enable any entity that hosts online journal articles to produce these reports

Propose a model for a Central Clearing House (CCH) in which these reports might be consolidated at a global level in a standard way.

PIRUS: nature and mission of the Central Clearing House

One global CCH Cost-effective Industry is global, with global standards Easier to set and modify standards Simpler interface with publishers and

repositories Can be outsourced Existing organizations exist with the required

capabilities Scenarios to be supported

See next slide……..

Step 1: a fulltext article is downloaded

Step 2: tracker code invoked, generating an OpenURL log entry

Step A1: OpenURL log entries sent to CCH responsible for creating and consolidating the usage statistics

Step B1: OpenURL log entry sent to local server

Step A3: COUNTER-compliant usage statistics collected and collated per article (DOI) in XML format

Step B2: OpenURL log entries harvested by CCH responsible for creating and consolidating usage statistics

Step B5: COUNTER compliant usage statistics available from CCH to authorized parties

Step A4: COUNTER compliant usage statistics available from CCH to authorized parties

Step C1: OpenURL log entry sent to local server

Step A2: logs filtered by COUNTER rules

Step B4: COUNTER-compliant usage statistics collected and collated per article (DOI) in XML format

Step C2: logs filtered by COUNTER rules

Step C3: COUNTER-compliant usage statistics collected and collated per article (DOI) in XML format

Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C

Step B3: logs filtered by COUNTER rules

Step C4: COUNTER compliant usage statistics available from repository or publisher to CCH

PIRUS: CCH operating principles

The “bucket” of usage data should be controlled by the participants - they can decide whether to compile the usage reports themselves or to delegate that role to the CCH

Access to the CCH should be limited to authorised parties

Usage reports must state the sources from which they have been compiled to ensure transparency

PIRUS2: role of CCH

Role 1: consolidated processing (applies to most repositories and to some publishers)

Relies on all journal article downloads invoking a tracker code that sends data to a single big bucket Consolidated usage reports can be generated by the CCH

Single data standard, not necessarily data tool Requirements can be met by various counting or analytics packages Compliance with the standard can be checked by the “data gathering” audit

All data in one place allows mining - deeper insights into data and easy integration of other projects, e.g. JUF

Publishers who use this option could lose control of own data and report compilation Terms and Conditions could handle some aspects of this

All steps are auditable: Data gathering

• Process of sending data packet to bucket• Profile of data packet – does it meet standards?

Counting• Correct interpretation of data packets received

Compilation of usage reports• Correctness, completeness

Audit overhead lower due to standard system

PIRUS2: role of the CCH

Role 2: distributed processing (applies to most publishers and some repositories)

Relies on repositories and publishers gathering data in own buckets Publishers

• count and produce own usage reports according to the specifications of Article Report 1.

Repositories• count and produce own usage reports and send reports to CCH OR• send data to CCH who count and produce usage reports (and return to

repositories?) CCH sends repository reports to publishers

All steps are auditable: Data gathering

• Process of sending data packet to bucket• Profile of data packet – does it meet standards?

Counting• Correct interpretation of data packets received

Compilation of usage reports• Correctness, completeness

Many possible risk areas due to multiple supply points

PIRUS2: outputs from the CCH

Usage reports for publishers Usage reports for repositories Usage reports for research institutions

Key requirements: Set of core reports Flexibility in outputs

PIRUS2: example of a report

Technical: a workable technical model for the collection, processing and consolidation of individual article usage statistics has been developed.

Organizational: an organizational model for a Central Clearing House that would be responsible for the collection, processing and consolidation of usage statistics has been proposed.

Economic: the costs for repositories and publishers of generating the required usage reports, as well as the costs of any central clearing house/houses have been calculated and a model for recovering these costs has been proposed .

For full report on the PIRUS project go to:

http://www.projectcounter.org/News/Pirus2_oct2011.pdf

PIRUS: project outcomes

PIRUS: Next steps

The outcomes of the PIRUS project provide a solid technical and organizational model on which to base a standard and process for the recording and reporting of usage at the individual article level. The next steps to be taken are as follows:

Publication of a draft PIRUS Code of Practice Based on COUNTER standards Reporting usage at the individual article level

Specification of a structure for the ongoing governance of PIRUS

Stepwise implementation of the CCH

PIRUS: Next steps- a draft PIRUS Code of Practice

The Code of Practice will be consistent with COUNTER and will provide: A list of Definitions and other terms that are relevant to PIRUS A methodology for the recording and reporting of usage at the individual

article level, including specifications for the metadata to be recorded, and the content types and article versions whose usage may be counted.

Specifications for the PIRUS usage reports Data processing rules to ensure that the usage data are credible, consistent

and compatible Specifications for the independent auditing of the PIRUS reports A description of the role of the Central Clearing House

  The draft Code of Practice will be published in early 2012, for comments

Publishers are already requesting a PIRUS Code of Practice and will be able to test the draft Code of Practice using their own data

PIRUS: governance

Principles Independent, not-for-profit organization International Representation of the main stakeholder groups

Repositories Publishers Research Institutions

Role Define and implement PIRUS mission Strategic oversight Set and monitor standards Set fees and manage finances Select and monitor suppliers

PIRUS: Next steps-Stepwise implementation of the CCH

In view of the technical challenges that the CCH faces, its strong dependency on other initiatives, such as ORCID and institutional identifier and the requirements for publishers to re-engineer some of their processes, it will be prudent to implement the CCH in two Stages:

Stage 1: gather and consolidate usage data only from repositories and provide the usage statistics generated by the CCH to publishers and other authorised bodies Work will begin on Stage 1 in 2012

Stage 2: and collect usage data from publishers that wish to use the CCH service for this purpose The timetable for implementation of Stage 2 will depend

on the outcomes of Stage 1

PIRUS: Further information and updates

For further information and updates on the PIRUS project:

http://www.projectcounter.org/news.html

For further information and updates on Scholarly iQ:

http://www.scholarlyiq.com