Skip to main content

Open Access Publisher Responds to White House with NO APC for Negative Research

By: WebWire

Partners in Digital Health (PDH) has announced a new, no APC fee, open access policy aimed specifically at negative, unconventional, null, neutral, and failed research, on the heels of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Federally Funded Research Guidance announcement.

A journal spokesperson stated: “Progress in science is not only made based on positive data, but also on negative results. Guidance to the scientific community should include and emphasize the importance of negative data across both public and open access scientific publications.” Scientists have become accustomed to celebrating only success and have forgotten that most technological advances stem from failure. When negative results aren't published in high-impact journals, other scientists can't learn from them and end up repeating failed experiments, leading to a waste of public funds and a delay in genuine progress.

Researchers are particularly challenged to disclose negative results that are not consistent with previously published positive data. In addition, positive findings are more likely to generate citations and funding for additional research, but negative data saves institutions funding wasteful projects and puts ecosystems on the right track for faster solutions and outcomes that benefit the entire ecosystem. This is critically important in new research fields and markets that are evolving - fostering real world applications and scaled implementations.

Partners in Digital Health is pleased to facilitate these critical efforts to accelerate research success, augment true innovation, and create a trusted repository where research, public, and private communities can find unconventional answers to streamline meaningful solutions. The publisher will waive the APC for negative and null research, for accepted peer reviewed manuscript submissions.

Negative results are not typically cited, and discouraged in academia, but are essential to advancing knowledge in the field, and may contribute to changing reward systems in academia in the future.

Topic areas will include but are not limited to the following:

  • What and why the research did not work, eg., rigor in study design, lack of funding, issue with patient recruitment, support from superiors or colleagues, bias, etc
  • Analysis of impact
  • Consequences of negative research
  • Lessons on mitigating negative results and why
  • Benefits of sharing research
  • Good research practices, best practices
  • Key personal learnings
  • Addressing issues of reproducibility
  • Ethical violations

Papers on related and complementary topics will be considered.

Submission Requirements

  • Papers should be original submissions not previously published or under active consideration by other journal
  • Papers will be 3,000 maximum word count
  • Submissions must include a section for an analysis and recommendations for future researchers, and journal readers

All papers will be peer reviewed and follow the journal's peer review process and workflow. There is no deadline for these manuscripts. Submissions may be from any country.

For questions regarding the suitability of a particular paper, send inquiries to

For further details visit:
Blockchain in Healthcare Today – click here for Call for Manuscripts

Telehealth and Medicine Today – click here for Call for Manuscripts

— WebWireID294090 —

Data & News supplied by
Stock quotes supplied by Barchart
Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes.
By accessing this page, you agree to the following
Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.