Decreasing Costs of Dissemination of Research Results by Publishing in Diamond Open Access Journals – PMC

“As always, you can read these articles for free, with neither you nor your institution having to pay for their access. The authors did not have to pay for publishing their manuscripts either. Food Technology and Biotechnology is a so-called diamond open access journal. It means that its budget is provided by financial supports of public institutions like the Croatian Ministry of Science and Education, Croatian Academy of Science and Arts, Croatian Society for Biotechnology, as well as the publisher – Faculty of Food Technology and Biotechnology of the University of Zagreb. Diamond open access journals constitute a rather small share of scientific journals in science communication spectrum in which the financiers are neither readers (through institutional library subscriptions), nor authors through article processing charges. Although the number of papers published in diamond OA journals is not high, they are often referred to as the publishing model of the future. The financial pattern in which journals are financed by public institutions, ministries or other state bodies like universities or professional associations avoids high charges imposed by private publishers, liberating more funds for direct research costs, or scientific infrastructure. The model is in line with the ultimate intentions announced by the cOAlition S and formulated in Plan S (1), although other business models for scientific publishing are discussed within this plan, as well. At first sight, diamond OA journals seem like the best solution both for the researchers aiming to publish their results without devoting much of their project funds for this purpose, and to those aiming to access them freely and easily. However, public financing may have pitfalls of their own. Stable long-term financing may be a problem for smaller professional associations whose income may vary significantly from year to year and may depend on the current leadership. Such societies may lose motivation to maintain a journal, particularly if it does not gain any income but whose publishing creates a significant expense. Universities and larger societies with higher annual income may prove as more stable financiers as scientific communication is a part of their ’core business’. Indeed, considering technical possibilities and informatics infrastructure in place at most universities, scientific publishing should not present a significant financial burden. Actually, most diamond access journals are indeed funded by universities (2). On the other hand, journals financed by state public institutions like ministries, public foundations or other bodies distributing public funds may depend on the current political option and their changes may lead to different political decisions reflecting on science budgets and, consequently, scientific journal financing. Besides, it should be noted that some of the high budget professional associations create most of their incomes through publishing activities, sometimes engaging large publishers for their journals. For these societies a turn towards diamond open access would require a significant change in the structure of their annual income. Thus, in a system in which a larger segment of scientific results would be published in diamond open access journals, finding stable sources of income would be a difficult but indispensable task for scientific journal publishers. This conclusion has been strongly corroborated by a large study funded by Science Europe in order to gain a better insight in the OA diamond landscape (2). The study estimated the number of diamond open access journals at around 29 000. Most of these journals are not included in DOAJ, they are smaller in size and publish less than 25 papers per year, many of them are issued annually, and most of them belong to social sciences and humanities. The majority of them are published in Europe and South America by small publishers who publish between 1 and 5 journals. More than 70% of diamond OA journals are published by universities, around 15% by publishing companies, while 10% belong to professional associations. Concerning their operation and financing, most diamond open access journals face operational challenges and rely heavily on the efforts of volunteers. As such, they declare a need to develop infrastructure and to increase funding to support their operations. Securing sufficient and stable funding from sources who would not gain profit from publishing may at least partly be facilitated by decreasing the costs and the overall budget of the journal. More than 70% of diamond OA journals have an annual budget lower than 10 000 euro. This, however, contradicts the increasing demands of the scientific community for fast, simple, and high-quality publishing process. A variety of informatics tools designed for handling manuscripts, correspondence among authors, editors and reviewers, as well as on-line publishing with concomitant abandoning printed versions may lead to less expensive dissemination of scientific results. Development of such tools and their distribution among journals, as w

Editorial Does the Scientific Community Need Another Open-Access Journal? | IEEE Journals & Magazine | IEEE Xplore

“If you are looking at the first papers published in the IEEE Open Journal of Engineering in Medicine and Biology (OJEMB) and you are wondering if the scientific community truly needed another open-access journal, you are not alone. I asked myself the same question when I was approached to serve as the Founding Editor-in-Chief of IEEE OJEMB. In fact, over the past two decades, we have witnessed the launch of a multitude of open-access journals, often lacking a well-defined scope and focus on publishing high-quality manuscripts….”

Frontiers | Key Factors for Improving Rigor and Reproducibility: Guidelines, Peer Reviews, and Journal Technical Reviews | Cardiovascular Medicine

Abstract:  To respond to the NIH’s policy for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical research, many journals have implemented guidelines and checklists to guide authors in improving the rigor and reproducibility of their research. Transparency in developing detailed prospective experimental designs and providing raw data are essential premises of rigor and reproducibility. Standard peer reviews and journal-specific technical and statistical reviews are critical factors for enhancing rigor and reproducibility. This brief review also shares some experience from Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, an American Heart Association journal, that has implemented several mechanisms to enhance rigor and reproducibility for preclinical research….

Investigating the Effectiveness of the Open Data Badge Policy at Psychological Science Through Computational Reproducibility

Abstract:  In April 2019, Psychological Science published its first issue in which all research articles received the Open Data badge. We used that issue to investigate the effectiveness of this badge, focusing on the adherence to its stated aim at Psychological Science: ensuring reproducibility of results. Twelve researchers of varying experience levels attempted to reproduce the results of the empirical articles in the target issue (at least three researchers per article). We found that all articles provided at least some data, 6/14 articles provided analysis code or scripts, only 1/14 articles was rated to be exactly reproducible, and 3/14 essentially reproducible with minor deviations. We recommend that Psychological Science require a check of reproducibility at the peer review stage before awarding badges, and that the Open Data badge be renamed “Open Data and Code” to avoid confusion and encourage researchers to adhere to this higher standard.

 

Dissemination of Plastic Surgery Research: An Analysis of PR… : Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open

Abstract:  Background: 

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) recently developed an open access counterpart, PRS Global Open (PRS-GO), to increase dissemination of research in an efficient and widespread manner. We aimed to (1) examine the differences in the dissemination of research published in PRS and PRS-GO, and (2) identify differences in the authorship between the journals.

Methods: 

We extracted data on Altmetric Attention Scores, article mentions, citations, and author characteristics using the Altmetric Explorer Database from January 1, 2018, to January 1, 2020. We stratified research outputs into traditional dissemination and social media dissemination. Additionally, multivariable linear regression models were used to examine differences in dissemination between the journals.

Results: 

A total of 1798 articles were included in the analysis (PRS = 1031, PRS-GO = 767). The average Altmetric Attention Score was higher for PRS compared with PRS-GO (PRS = 15.2, PRS-GO = 8.1). Articles in PRS had a greater Altmetric Attention Score (?-coefficient: 7.50, P < 0.001), higher measures of traditional dissemination (?-coefficient: 3.11, P < 0.001), and higher measures of social media dissemination than articles in PRS-GO (?-coefficient: 4.38, P = 0.73).

Conclusions: 

Despite being an open access journal, PRS-GO had significantly fewer measures of social media and traditional dissemination compared with PRS. Given that numerous factors may influence the dissemination of scientific literature, it is imperative that publications identify specific ways to provide a fair advantage for both researchers and readers. Additional initiatives to engage readership for open access may include creative campaigns targeting an appropriate audience.

Dissemination of Plastic Surgery Research: An Analysis of PR… : Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open

Abstract:  Background: 

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) recently developed an open access counterpart, PRS Global Open (PRS-GO), to increase dissemination of research in an efficient and widespread manner. We aimed to (1) examine the differences in the dissemination of research published in PRS and PRS-GO, and (2) identify differences in the authorship between the journals.

Methods: 

We extracted data on Altmetric Attention Scores, article mentions, citations, and author characteristics using the Altmetric Explorer Database from January 1, 2018, to January 1, 2020. We stratified research outputs into traditional dissemination and social media dissemination. Additionally, multivariable linear regression models were used to examine differences in dissemination between the journals.

Results: 

A total of 1798 articles were included in the analysis (PRS = 1031, PRS-GO = 767). The average Altmetric Attention Score was higher for PRS compared with PRS-GO (PRS = 15.2, PRS-GO = 8.1). Articles in PRS had a greater Altmetric Attention Score (?-coefficient: 7.50, P < 0.001), higher measures of traditional dissemination (?-coefficient: 3.11, P < 0.001), and higher measures of social media dissemination than articles in PRS-GO (?-coefficient: 4.38, P = 0.73).

Conclusions: 

Despite being an open access journal, PRS-GO had significantly fewer measures of social media and traditional dissemination compared with PRS. Given that numerous factors may influence the dissemination of scientific literature, it is imperative that publications identify specific ways to provide a fair advantage for both researchers and readers. Additional initiatives to engage readership for open access may include creative campaigns targeting an appropriate audience.

Quantitative Science Studies successfully completes transparent peer review pilot | International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics

“In August 2020 Quantitative Science Studies (QSS) started a transparent peer review pilot, in close collaboration with our publisher, MIT Press. For articles accepted for publication in QSS, the review reports, along with the responses of the authors and the decision letters of the editor, were published in Publons, provided that the authors agreed to participate in the pilot. Reviewer identities were not revealed, unless reviewers preferred to give up their anonymity.

By publishing review reports, QSS aims to provide insight into the strengths and weaknesses of an article and into unresolved disagreements among authors, reviewers, and editors. This information may provide helpful context for readers. It also increases the accountability of reviewers and editors.

We are pleased to announce the successful completion of the QSS transparent peer review pilot. An overwhelming majority of the authors who submitted their work to QSS decided to participate in the pilot. For 90% of the articles submitted to QSS during the pilot and accepted for publication in the journal, the authors agreed to publish the review reports. The review reports for these articles are openly available in Publons under a CC BY license. In a limited number of cases, reviewers decided to reveal their identity….”

Journal editor explains ban on manuscripts from Russian institutions – Retraction Watch

“First of all, let me say, because there is some misunderstanding circulating in some social media regarding the issue you asked me for information, that the editors of the Journal of Molecular Structure did not decide to implement any sort of ban to articles submitted by Russian authors. This would be something I, or my colleagues, could never accept. Our Russian colleagues, as all our colleagues from all around the world, deserve us maximum respect.

However, it was decided by the editors of the journal to not consider manuscripts authored by scientists working at Russian Institutions, in result of the humanitarian implications emerging from the invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation. This position is temporary and shall apply until the refugees (whoever they are, Ukrainians, Russians, or of any other nationality) have conditions to return to their homes, their jobs, and join their families….”

Implementing an Open & FAIR data sharing policy—A case study in the earth and environmental sciences – Cannon – 2022 – Learned Publishing – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  This paper outlines the impact of the introduction of an Open & FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) data sharing policy on six earth and environmental science journals published by Taylor & Francis, beginning in November 2019. Notably, 18 months after implementing this new policy, we observed minimal impacts on submission, acceptance rates, or peer-review times for the participating journals. This paper describes the changes that were required to internal systems and processes in order to implement the new policy, and compares our findings with recent literature reports on the impact of journals introducing data-sharing policies.

Into the second decade | Open Biology

“Open Biology is 10 years old and we have much to celebrate. Open Biology launched as the Royal Society’s first fully online, open access journal dedicated to cell and molecular biology. The underlying principle of Open Biology is to enable discoveries to be quickly and easily disseminated through the community, and in this vein in the first 10 years of the journal we have introduced format-free submission, mandated open peer review where the reviews and author responses are published with the paper, and established our enthusiastic Preprint Team under the guidance of Prof. Michael Ginger. Credit for most of this success is due to the guiding hand of David Glover, our founding editor, and the team at Royal Society Publishing….”

Open Access at Nature Metabolism | Nature Metabolism

“The future of science is open and the publishing landscape is changing as a result. The transition from subscription to open access (OA) publishing is irreversible. The benefits of OA for authors are obvious: by making the final version of a research article — the version of record — free to read and discoverable for everyone, OA allows researchers’ work to reach a broader audience and to make a bigger impact.

Since January 2021, all authors of newly submitted manuscripts can benefit from these advantages, as they can now choose an OA publishing option when their work is accepted for publication in Nature Metabolism. OA publication is supported by payment of an article processing charge of €9500, which is typically paid by the authors’ institutions and funding bodies, or is covered by ‘transformative agreements’ (more on these below)….”

Celebrating the 50th Issue of Qatar Medical Journal: Editorial Letter | QScience.com

It is with great pride that we celebrate the 50th issue of Qatar Medical Journal (QMJ) that has achieved significant growth recently. Our mission is to encourage authors to submit high-quality and innovative research promoting medical advancements. In the past two years, manuscripts submissions have tripled in number and were enriched by a more diverse pool of authors with global representation, resulting in an increase in the number of published issues moving from being a biannual to a triannual journal. Additionally, the number of articles published in an issue has doubled. QMJ continues to be an open-access peer-reviewed journal, publishing original research work, reviews, editorials, and case reports that are particularly relevant to medicine and free of charge to authors. It is indexed in several renowned and highly ranked platforms such as PubMed Central, Scopus, Scimago, Google Scholar, and the Directory of Open Access Journals. It was also recently indexed in the World Health Organization’s Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region (IMEMR). We look forwards to becoming the highest-rated medical journal, in terms of impact factor, regionally.

 

What has Royal Society Open Science achieved in its first few years? | Royal Society Open Science

Abstract:  It has been a pleasure and a privilege to serve as the first Editor-in-Chief of Royal Society Open Science for the past 6 years. I step down at the end of December 2021, having completed two 3-year terms, and am taking the opportunity here to reflect on some of the successes and challenges that the journal has experienced and the innovations that we have introduced. When I was first approached back in 2015, the breadth of the journal, covering the whole of science, resonated with my own interests: my research career has ranged across the entire landscape of chemistry, while my leadership roles have embraced all of science, technology and medicine. The open access ethos, the objective refereeing policy that rejects the idea of only publishing what is in fashion, and the opportunities offered by a new venture that could transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries also all appealed to me. Among our successful innovations are Registered Reports, Replication Studies and the new ‘Science, Society and Policy’ section. The challenges have included the transition to paid article processing charges (APCs), whether to resist pressure to retract a controversial paper, and bullying of young female authors by established senior males in the same field. I explore all of these below, provide some statistics on the journal’s performance, also cover some of the notable papers we have published, and provide some concluding thoughts.

 

Open Access Publications is our mission in 2022: perspective from the editors of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation – Montecucco – – European Journal of Clinical Investigation – Wiley Online Library

“The impact factor of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation (EJCI) and also of other scientific journals has dramatically increased in 2020. At the Editorial Board Meeting in September 2021, we felt very proud of our work since January 2020, when we became the new Editors of EJCI. In contrast to other journals, we managed to attract not only COVID-19- 1, 2 but also non-COVID-19-related articles 3, 4 receiving many citations and contributing to the impact factor of 2020. Obviously, we are indebted to all authors choosing EJCI for their submissions/publications as well to all reviewers involved in judging the submitted manuscripts (list of reviewers displayed in Table 1). We have the impression that our Journal not only gained in terms of quality as expressed in the higher impact factor, but also in the organization of handling the increasing number of submissions. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic-related involvement in clinical and scientific work, the time of revision and final decision were markedly reduced in 2020 and established in 2021. At the Editorial Meeting, we discussed how to further improve our Journal in the near future. There was a broad consensus stating that we should push on the quality of Research Articles, Reviews and Editorials. Although it seems quite obvious, this mission appears to be a real challenge for Editors. What is “quality” of an article? Consensus was obtained on appropriate methodological requirements, high clinical relevance and usefulness for patients’ care. This should hold for both basic/translational and clinical research. Based on these criteria that will be our “North Star” for next year, we also realized that after selecting a top-level article, it is mandatory to promote its diffusion as well. In this regard, we acknowledge that all articles should be pushed to be freely shared in an “Open Access” (OA) mode. OA means that the article has not any financial, legal or technical barriers to be consulted by any reader from all over the world. The relevance of OA has been excellently demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, the European Community has indicated that the principal investigators of European Grants should publish their articles from the funded project as OA. One major issue is that publishing OA requires a payment of a fee per article by the author to the publisher, the so-called article processing charge (APC). The mean APC is around €2000 but varies greatly between journals from €1000 to €5000 per article. Therefore, some financial issues in particular from low-income countries might limit worldwide spread of science. In order to avoid this practical, but fundamental burden, we would inform the readers that our publisher Wiley has implemented some conventions with institutes, universities and even countries (Figure 1) in order to cover the APC of the OA publications….”

 

10 years of open access publishing at the BIR

“BJR is the world’s oldest radiology journal, and for 117 years any non-member of the British Institute of Radiology (BIR) wanting to read articles published in BJR was charged a subscription. This model changed a decade ago, in 2012, when an open access option was launched for BJR and DMFR. Specifically, in exchange for an article processing charge (APC), authors could have their article made immediately available, allowing anyone worldwide with an internet connection to read the research without the barrier of a paywall.

For some authors, the option to publish open access fulfilled a desire to make their work more widely accessible to readers, and for others, it satisfied a requirement from their funding bodies or institutions. Offering this option to our authors was a key milestone in the life of BJR and to mark this event, we will be celebrating 10 years of open access throughout 2022.

Currently, BJR and DMFR offer a hybrid open access model where some journal articles are offered open access whilst others remain available only to subscribers. This model has now become the norm for many other journals and allows authors, depending on their circumstances, different options to publish their work. The model has proved successful. In 2012, we published just a single open access article in BJR, increasing to almost 20% of published content in 2021 (Figure 1)….”