As a researcher, what is more important to you than a record of your research and scholarship? A Digital Persistent Identifier, or DPI, distinguishes you and your work from that of your peers. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

Every researcher needs a Digital Persistent Identifier.

As a researcher, what is more important to you than a record of your research and scholarship? A Digital Persistent Identifier, or DPI, distinguishes you and your work from that of your peers – and having one will be mandated for those receiving federal funding. Let’s take a deeper look at why this number is so important. We’ll also compare the different platforms— ORCID, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar — so that you can be sure your publications, presentations, peer reviews and even information about who is citing you are being properly stored and accessed.

ORCID

There are many types of profiles and DPIs that can meet your needs, but there’s no silver bullet. Placing your work onto multiple platforms is necessary according to Andrea Malone, Research Visibility and Impact Coordinator at UH Libraries. She cautions researchers to “be realistic about how many identifiers you can maintain.”

The most popular is ORCID, which stands for Open Researcher and Contributor ID. It’s free to set up, and there is no chance of accidentally or on-purpose having multiple ORCID accounts – it’s assigned to you like a social security number and follows you, the researcher. This comes in particularly especially handy for researchers with common names.

An identifier is federally mandated for those receiving governmental funds. It is not specified that ORCID must be that identifier. For example, according to Malone: “a Web of Science profile also assigns an identifier, which would also satisfy the mandate.” But most researchers choose ORCID because it’s publicly available with no access restrictions.

While an ORCID number is free for researchers, there is a subscription fee for an institution to be associated with ORCID. Information will not pre-populate in an ORCID profile and it doesn’t track citation counts – it only shows what you put in. There are, however, linking wizards that allow you to link from Web of Science and Scopus to your ORCID account. If you choose this option, citations will automatically populate in your ORCID profile. It’s up to the researcher to doublecheck to be sure the information has automated, however.

Google Scholar

Google Scholar is a profile, not an identifier, so it does not comply with federal funding requirements. It is free, however, and it pulls from the open web. You can choose to have your list of articles updated automatically, review the updates yourself or manually update your articles at any time. Google Scholar also specifies which articles are open access. A PDF or HTML icon will appear on the righthand side of each citation for one to download articles.

Web of Science Vs. Scopus

Scopus is known for covering more journals and a wider range of metrics to evaluate research impact than Web of Science. Different platforms are a go-to for certain disciplines – for example, Web of Science is usually associated with hard sciences, although investigators in the social sciences and humanities also place their work on this platform from time to time. It’s a good idea to check out which platforms others in your discipline are using for their profiles.

Staying up-to-date

Of course, DPIs don’t work as intended unless researchers keep their profiles current. That means you need to check your profile after every publication and every time you switch to a new institution. Just as you would update your CV, you must update your ORCID or other DPI profile.

One tactic Malone suggests is setting a schedule either biweekly or monthly to check all your profiles. “One thing that’s helpful is that with all of them, you can set up alerts and create an alert as often as you want,” Malone goes on. “At that time, the program will scrawl the content within the source and alert you to anytime any of your publications appear in their database.”

The Big Idea

No one tool can paint a complete picture of all your scholarship. Be strategic and intentional about which platforms you use. Consider your audience, the platforms others in your discipline use and make sure you have an ORCID profile to comply with the federal mandate. But be careful not to sign up for more than you can feasibly maintain and keep current.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Sarah Hill, the author of this piece, is the communications manager for the UH Division of Research.


Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

UH Health names leader of new digital health institute

new exec

Recently launched UH Health has named the first-ever executive director of its new Institute for Digital Healthcare Transformation at the University of Houston.

Beto López has been tapped to lead the new initiative that aims to help develop and commercialize health care technologies centered around university research.

Launched in August, the Institute for Digital Healthcare Transformation leans on experts from UH’s engineering, medicine, business, law and other departments and will connect with industry partners. It will initially focus on mobile health applications, sensors, wearables and artificial intelligence, according to UH.

“Most digital health initiatives and commercialization efforts start with the technology and hope adoption follows. But the translation gap isn't a science problem — it’s a scaffolding problem between researchers, the community and the market,” López said in a news release. “I've spent the past 10 years building that scaffolding in places that weren’t wired for it, and I'm looking forward to building it here at UH to help ensure new health care technologies reach the people and communities that can benefit from them most.”

López previously spent 10 years at San Francisco-based innovation consultancy company IDEO, where he led over 100 projects for Fortune 500 companies and public agencies. He co-founded and served as managing director of the Design Institute for Health at UT Austin’s Dell Medical School; and also co-founded a social venture studio/venture capital fund focused on health care innovation. He worked alongside Houston’s Legacy Community Health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Beto understands that breakthrough technology alone doesn't transform health care — it has to be designed around the needs of patients, providers and communities and have a clear path into practice,” Jonathan McCullers, vice president for health affairs at UH, added in the news release. “His experience spanning academic health care and venture capital equips him to bring together researchers, health care organizations, entrepreneurs and investors. This makes him uniquely suited to lead this institute and help turn the university's innovation into solutions that improve people's lives.”

The University of Houston launched UH Health, its new cross-disciplinary academic venture, in July. It aims to bring together the university's health-related education, research and community impact under one umbrella.

ExxonMobil gets approval for $5B Texas Gulf Coast carbon capture project

CCS Expansion

Spring-based ExxonMobil has won approval from the Texas Railroad Commission for a $5 billion carbon capture and storage project in East Texas.

Dominic Genetti, senior vice president of CCS at ExxonMobil, told The Financial Times, which broke the news, that the Railroad Commission’s action is a “major milestone” that lets the company keep expanding along the Gulf Coast. In a 2-1 vote, commissioners authorized a carbon sequestration permit for the project.

“The Railroad Commission clearly recognizes the important role carbon capture and storage can play in meeting growing global demand for lower-carbon products while supporting new jobs and economic growth,” Genetti said.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved ExxonMobil’s Rose CCS project last year.

The project will enable the company to inject about 53 metric tons of industrial customers’ carbon emissions into three underground wells it drilled in the Beaumont-Port Arthur area. Over a 13-year period, ExxonMobil plans to inject about 4 million metric tons per year into the Fleming and Upper Frio rock formations, according to Carbon Herald.

ExxonMobil says it owns the world’s first and largest CCS system, comprising 1,300 miles of CO2 pipeline and secure storage sites. Seventy percent of the pipelines are along the Gulf Coast.

The company ramped up its CCS business in 2023 with the $4.9 billion purchase of Denbury, which owned about 1,000 miles of CO2 pipelines.

“Our expertise, combined with Denbury’s talent and CO2 pipeline network, expands our low-carbon leadership and best positions us to meet the decarbonization needs of industrial customers while also reducing emissions in our own operations,” ExxonMobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said when the deal closed.

In January, Genetti wrote in a post on ExxonMobil’s website that the company is committed to CCS “for the long haul.”

“CCS is not new technology, but it’s flown relatively under the radar compared with the attention that production of hydrocarbons commands,” he wrote. “Now, as the world becomes more aware of the need to reduce emissions, CCS finally has a brighter spotlight and a broader runway to scale up.”

The company also announced this week that it has begun CCS operations at a direct reduced iron facility in Convent, Louisiana. The project will capture, transport and store up to 800,000 metric tons of CO2 per year, according to the company.

---

This article first appeared on EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

Houston researchers develop breakthrough device that could bypass spinal injuries

breakthrough research

Scientists at Houston Methodist have announced a significant leap forward for spinal cord injury recovery.

The researchers have developed a device that essentially bypasses spinal injuries, allowing signals from previously “lost” functions to reach the brain, a new study published in Nature Communications shows.

“Most current technologies try to improve whatever function remains after a spinal cord injury,” Dr. Damiano Barone, assistant professor of neurosurgery in the Department of Neurosurgery at Houston Methodist and co-lead on the study, said in a news release. “Our goal is different. Rather than fixing the injury itself, we want to bypass it completely and create an alternative route for signals to travel.”

The study involved a single ultrathin circumferential electrode array made to conform around the spinal cord without penetrating neural tissue, which was implanted into rodent and pig models with spinal injuries. The electrode array was able to interpret motor, sensory and autonomic signals around the injury. Think of it as a set of detours that restore road access to isolated towns after a disaster destroys the highway instead of just rebuilding the highway.

Over the course of three days, the arrays detected signals of intended movement from low-frequency spinal oscillations with more than 94 percent accuracy. This worked across species and was replicated in feasibility studies on human cadavers.

This research could serve as a new foundation for neuroprosthetic implants that could restore connectivity to the 2.5 million people worldwide suffering from spinal injuries that result in loss of ability. Future development could result in everything from restored organ function to mobility, according to Houston Methodist.

George Malliaras, the Prince Professor of Technology in the Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge, who co-led the study, sees it as a fundamental restructuring of the science of spinal trauma.

“This could represent a paradigm change in how we think about spinal cord injuries,” Malliaras said. “Instead of starting from the idea that what is lost is gone forever, this approach asks whether we can restore function by carrying the signal around the injury.”

Further work involving laboratory models will need to be completed before launching human trials.

Grants from the National Institutes of Health, Houston Methodist Katz Investigator Award, Helaers Research Award and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council helped support the study. Other collaborators on the study include Salim Hadwe, Ruben Serrano, George Psaltakis, Margaux Forner, Chaeyeon Lee, Sydney Swedick, Moleca Ghnnam, Tawfique Hasan and Alejandro Carnicer-Lombarte from the University of Cambridge; and Anton Banta and Xueer Zhang from Houston Methodist.