Luis Ibanez
2012-01-04 01:34:20 UTC
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652
"...In March 2011, a promising new cognitive screening tool that was to be
available through âopen access,â the Sweet 16 â a 16-item assessment of
thinking, learning, and memory developed by Harvard's Tamara
Fong3<http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652#ref3> â
was removed from the Internet at the request of PAR in an apparent
copyright dispute.4
<http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652#ref4> The
Sweet 16 includes orientation and three-object recall items, similar to the
MMSE's, along with a digit-span item. This action, unprecedented for a
bedside clinical assessment tool, has sent a chill through the academic
community; clearly, clinicians and researchers can no longer live in
blissful ignorance of copyright."
...
"...Restrictive licensing of such basic tools wastes resources, prevents
standardization, and detracts from efforts to improve patient care."
...
"..Any new tool developed with public funds should be required to use a
copyleft or similar license to guarantee the freedom to distribute and
improve it, similar to the requirement for open-access publication of
research funded by the National Institutes of Health"
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652
"...In March 2011, a promising new cognitive screening tool that was to be
available through âopen access,â the Sweet 16 â a 16-item assessment of
thinking, learning, and memory developed by Harvard's Tamara
Fong3<http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652#ref3> â
was removed from the Internet at the request of PAR in an apparent
copyright dispute.4
<http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652#ref4> The
Sweet 16 includes orientation and three-object recall items, similar to the
MMSE's, along with a digit-span item. This action, unprecedented for a
bedside clinical assessment tool, has sent a chill through the academic
community; clearly, clinicians and researchers can no longer live in
blissful ignorance of copyright."
...
"...Restrictive licensing of such basic tools wastes resources, prevents
standardization, and detracts from efforts to improve patient care."
...
"..Any new tool developed with public funds should be required to use a
copyleft or similar license to guarantee the freedom to distribute and
improve it, similar to the requirement for open-access publication of
research funded by the National Institutes of Health"
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110652