Open Access publishing in Medicine: lights and shadows.
Bernabo, N.; Valbonetti, L.; Ordinelli, A.; Ciccarelli, R.; Barboni, B.
Show abstract
The widespread use of internet has had enormous consequences in changing the way of accessing to scientific literature in all domains of knowledge and, in particular, in medicine. One of the most important related factors is the idea of making research output freely available: the so-called Open Access (OA) option. OA is considered very important in spreading of knowledge, breaking down barriers in benefit of research, and increasing the impact of research outputs within the scientific community. Here, we carried out a comparison between Non-Open Access (NOA) and OA medical Journals in terms of growing rate, geographical distribution, and the impact on scientific community. We collected the bibliometric data on the scientific Journals indexed in Scopus starting from 2001 to 2016 published either as NOA or OA. Then, we analysed the number of Journals, their geolocalization, their impact on the scientific community, and the parameters as SJR, H index, and cites for document (2 years). As a result, we found that while the number of NOA Journals is virtually stable, that of OA is dramatically increasing, with a growing rate higher than 400% in 2016. Then, the majority of OA Journals are published in developing Countries (Brazil, India, South Africa, South Korea, New Zealand, Serbia, and Poland) and their impact within researchers is lower compared to the NOA Journals. In conclusion, our data provide an updated and unprecedented picture of OA adoption in medical field, with its lights and shadows. Article HighlightsO_LIWe are seeing in medicine a huge increase in the number of Journals that use OA; C_LIO_LIThis trend is mainly due to the increase in publishing Journals in Countries with emergent economies; C_LIO_LIThe use of OA for Journals in the medical field, did not guarantee a vantage in term of bibliometric parameters. C_LI MCS92C99 JELI30
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Investigating the Nature of Open Science Practices Across Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: An Audit 95%
- Attitudes and Practices of Open Data, Preprinting, and Peer-review - a Cross Sectional Study on Croatian Scientists 94%
- Knowledge and motivations of training in peer review: an international cross-sectional survey 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Research productivity and collaboration of the NIH-funded HIV Vaccine Trials Network: a bibliometric analysis 91%
- Perceptions of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine: Insights from a Large-Scale International Cross-Sectional Survey of Surgery Researchers and Clinicians 90%
- BESFA: Bioinformatics based Evolutionary, Structural & Functional Analysis of Prostrate, Placenta, Ovary, Testis, and Embryo (POTE) Paralogs 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Inflated citations and metrics of journals discontinued from Scopus for publication concerns: the GhoS(t)copus Project 97%
- A cross-sectional audit and survey of Open Science and Data Sharing practices at The Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital 92%
- Global research on syndemics: A meta-knowledge analysis (2001-2020) 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Does it pay to pay? A comparison of the benefits of open-access publishing across various sub-fields in Biology 93%
- Structured Peer Review: Pilot results from 23 Elsevier Journals 93%
- A machine learning approach for identification of gastrointestinal predictors for the risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Researcher and Clinician Preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool: A Mixed-Methods Survey and Focus Group Study 91%
- Multi-tissue network analysis for drug prioritization in knee osteoarthritis 91%
- Meta-analysis of transcriptomes of SARS-Cov2 infected human lung epithelial cells identifies transmembrane serine proteases co-expressed with ACE2 and biological processes related to viral entry, immunity, inflammation and cellular stress. 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.