Now that we know why these articles got their red dots, what do we need to do to make them compliant and get green dots for them? First of all, if the article gets a red dot because it was never submitted to the NIH, then the manuscript must be submitted to become compliant. Secondly, even if the submission process started, it could've stopped at a certain point when the NIH requests additional materials to be submitted, such as a missing figure or data table. It could also be that the submitted manuscript does not meet certain requirements of the NIH. In those cases, the requested materials must be submitted before the article can be compliant. I can find out if I need to submit additional materials if I click on the NIHMSID link. I'll be redirected to the NIHMS system, and if I have the proper permissions I can see the exact status of the submission. Now, I'm not related to this article, and that's why I can't see the details about this particular submission. But if I were related to this article, I would be able to see a lot more details, including, what exactly is missing in the submission. Now, before we go ahead and submit our manuscript, or any additional materials, we need to figure out who is supposed to do the submission. This can get really complicated due to the inconsistent practices on the publisher's side. Some publishers will do the submission for you, some will not do it for you, some will do it if you ask them to do so, some will do it for you if you indicate that the article arises from an NIH grant when you submit it for publication. Some will not even allow you to do it yourself. Sometimes journals from the same publisher can have different policies. The NIH public access website shows four different scenarios for submitting the manuscript. Method A is "publisher does everything". That's the best. The NIH has a list of those journals that will do this for you. You can do a search here for your journal - if it is listed here, then you should be all set. Now, notice that even if the journal says they will do it for you, you as an NIH awardee are ultimately responsible for making sure that the article is compliant. If for some reason the journal didn't submit, or the process was not completed in time, it is still your responsibility to follow up with the publisher, and make sure that they do what they say they do. One common reason for that to happen is that the publisher asks the author if the paper arises from an NIH grant when the manuscript is submitted for publication, and if that question is not properly answered, or totally ignored for that matter, those publishers will not automatically deposit the article for you, because they don't know if they should or not. Method B is similar to Method A, but you must make specific arrangements with the publisher on a case-by-case basis. Usually this involves choosing the journals fee-based open access option for publishing the article. If you do choose that, the publisher is supposed to handle everything else for you. Again, you, as an NIH Awardee, are ultimately responsible, so you should still follow up with the publisher, if for some reason the article becomes non-compliant. Method C is "author does everything". You submit the manuscript, and correspond with the NIH regarding the processing and approval of the manuscript. Method D is most complicated, and typically is where a lot of the problems are. These are the publishers who will submit the manuscript for you to the NIH, but you as an author must complete the process by approving the manuscript for processing. There are a couple of resources you can check to determine who's supposed to submit the manuscript to the NIH. First, of course, if the instructions for authors from the journal you publish in clearly states their policy regarding public access, you should follow the instructions there. This wiki page, maintained by Simmons College, lists the NIH public access policy for most publishers. It also links back to the "Instructions for Authors" page for those publishers. Secondly, as we have seen, the NIH public access website lists the names of all those Method A journals, and names of publishers for Methods B and D. So if your article falls into these three categories - A, B, and D - you can, or sometimes have to, contact the publisher of your article to have them submit the manuscript or any missing supplementary materials that the NIH requests in order to complete the process. If your article falls into Category C, or in some cases, if you have permission from the publisher to submit it yourself for articles in Categories A, B, and D, you will need to obtain a copy of the manuscript and submit it yourself using the NIHMS system. Now the trick here is that, in most cases, you're supposed to submit the final peer reviewed manuscript, rather than the final published article. This is the manuscript that is approved for publication after the peer review process, but before the journal formatting and copy editing process. Normally you cannot just pull the .pdf of the article off the publisher's website and submit that, because the formatting and copy editing work is the intellectual property of the publisher. If you have the right material, it is quite simple to submit it using the NIHMS system - you just need to follow the instructions on the screen, and it takes only a couple of minutes to do that. After the submission, you will need to pay specific attention to correspondence email messages from the NIH to complete the process. Now the other common reason for incomplete submission process, and therefore noncompliant articles, is that someone needs to approve the final manuscript for public access. For example, for this article the NIHMS status is "Waiting for author approval of final WEB version of manuscript". A lot of the times this is what happens: an author or publisher submits the manuscript to the NIH and thinks that the process is complete. That's a common mistake. After the NIH receives and validates the submission, it generates an email message to the designated person to approve the final version of the article to be deposited to PubMed Central. If that person neglected the email message - didn't see it, thought it was spam, or for whatever other reason - and then the process stopped there, and is never completed. The article is then marked as "non-compliant" three months after the article was published. This is especially common for Method D articles, where the submitter and the approver are different people. If the NIHMS status of your paper is "Awaiting approval", you will need to first determine who is supposed to approve the submission. Obviously for Method A and B articles, the publisher is supposed to approve, but again, if they don't, you should follow up with them and make sure that they fix whatever needs to be fixed, and approve the final submission. In most cases though, the author is supposed to approve the submission. You will need to contact the NIHMS staff to have them re-send that email message. So click on "Contact Us" down at the bottom of the page - this will pop up a window, and you can see the article information is up on the top - and at the bottom, there is a simple form you can fill out. You can just say "Please resend email message regarding approval of final web version of manuscript." I would also include the NIHMSID, PMID, and my email address, just in case. When your request is processed, a new email message will be sent to the designated person - usually the corresponding author - requesting approval. If you are not the corresponding author, and the corresponding author somehow cannot be reached, you can request that the NIH send the approval email to you, if you are related to the article. That way, you can approve the submission yourself, and the article will become compliant. Just indicate that in the message to the NIHMS staff using the same contact form. So in these videos, we went over what you need to do to make sure your articles are in compliance, and your NIH funding is uninterrupted in July 2013. To sum up, here's a flow chart of what needs to be done. First, make sure that your MyNCBI account, and your eRA Commons account are properly linked. Then log into MyNCBI and access MyBibliography. Then make sure that citations of all the articles you'd like to check compliance statuses of are in the bibliography. Then make sure that the bibliography is in the "Awards" view. If there are articles with a status of "unknown", then we'll move on to Page 2, and for articles with a status of "non- compliant", we'll move on to Page 3. If you have none of these, you should be all set for now, but you will still need to maintain and monitor MyBibliography for any future articles that may become non-compliant. Then for each of the articles with the status of "unknown" - if it arises from a NIH grant, you need to associate the grant with it, and then, most likely, the status becomes "non-compliant". For the ones that did not arise from an NIH grant, you can edit its status so that the status will become N/A. For each of the articles with a status of "non-compliant", we need to find out why. It could be that the system is wrong, and the article did not need to be submitted (non-peer reviewed, non-Latin script, et cetera). Then you can edit its status, and indicate that, so that the status of the article becomes N/A. If the reason for non-compliance is "Citation not in NIHMS or PMC", then the manuscript needs to be submitted. We need to first determine who's supposed to submit: if the publisher is supposed to submit, we need to contact the publisher, and follow up with them to make sure that they do submit. If we are supposed to submit ourselves, then we need to obtain the final peer-reviewed manuscript and submit it via the NIHMS system, and follow up with the NIHMS staff for processing and approval. If the reason for non-compliance is "No PMCID 3 months post publication", then we need to further find out why the article submission process is not complete. If the NIH needs more materials, then the same process for submission applies here. If the NIH is awaiting approval, then we need to find out who's supposed to approve. If it is the publisher, then we contact and follow up with the publisher. If we are supposed to approve, then we contact NIHMS staff to have them re-send the approval request email, and follow up with them to make sure that the article is compliant. That's it for these tutorials - I hope they're helpful. Thanks for watching.