Welcome to author Nitika Pant Pai – impassioned OA advocate!

Today, we’re pleased to announce a new article entitled Head to head comparisons in performance of CD4 point–of-care assays: A Bayesian meta-analysis (2000-2013) by multiple award-winning researcher Nitika Pant Pai, Assistant Professor at McGill University in the Department of Medicine and a Scientist at the MUHC Research Institute and her co-authors Samantha WilkinsonTiago ChiavegattiBenedicte Nauche and Lawrence Joseph.

To mark the publication of her first ScienceOpen article, Nitika, who is also a member of our Editorial Board, prepared this video which is compelling both for what she says and how she says it – with a great deal of commitment!

Just 35 seconds into the video, a big smile spreads over Nitika’s face as she starts to talk about Open Access (OA) and her fist goes up as she says “more power to Open Access”! From then on, she discusses her real-life experiences of not having access to journals when she was training in India, wanting to spare others the same experience and why OA was therefore “the jewel for me”. Nitika’s enthusiasm for OA is infectious and energizing, she calls it a “pure movement”, says it is a way to “give back to the community” and believes it is going to permeate all sections of society, helping knowledge to spread.

Image credit: Jewel by Jenny Downing, https://www.flickr.com/photos/jenny-pics/, CC BY
Image credit: Jewel by Jenny Downing, https://www.flickr.com/photos/jenny-pics/, CC BY

On the topic of post-publication peer-review, which is a central tenet of ScienceOpen, Nitika believes that key scientific findings need to be discussed and debated with a healthy dose of skepticism but observes that findings that don’t appeal to the collective intelligence of peer-reviewers often get unfairly killed. She supports ScienceOpen for encouraging discussion by publishing research in the open, by allowing experts to comment and improve upon it, and trying to raise the quality of peer-review generally which has been one of the key critiques of OA journals,

In terms of ScienceOpen specifically, she urges us to “stay true to our philosophy” (which she believes we will, as do we!) and build on our innovative concept with two strong ideas to encourage earlier career scientists to engage with OA, which we support.

As Nitika says at the end of her video, “OA has a good future, we just have to make it happen”. We agree.