“JMIR Publications has announced the renewal of our multi-payer agreement with the University of California (UC) for an additional year. Renewal of the agreement continues UC’s funding support for its affiliated authors who choose to publish in JMIR’s unique portfolio of journals, which focus on digital health and public health, and include a new generation of overlay journals (JMIRx).
The pilot agreement was originally signed in 2020 and was the first multi-payer deal completed by UC with a fully open access publisher. According to the agreement, the 10 UC campus libraries contribute the first USD $1000 of any JMIR article processing charge (APC) for eligible authors. Protocols can be published free of charge for the authors. Authors are asked to pay the remainder of the APC from their research funds, if available.
This cost-sharing model is designed to enable the UC libraries to stretch their available funds to support as many authors as possible. If an author does not have research funds to cover the balance, the UC libraries will pay the entire APC on their behalf, ensuring that lack of research funds does not present a barrier for UC authors who wish to publish in JMIR’s open access journals. Under the renewed deal, UC authors will continue to benefit through December 31, 2022….”
“Some universities in the United States and United Kingdom are eyeing a scheme, due to be rolled out in 2022, that could see them pay their academics’ article-processing charges more often, instead of the costs coming out of the researchers’ own grant funding.
Under Plan P, universities that have signed up to the initiative will agree to pay US$500 for the peer review of every manuscript its academics submit to the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) and its sister journals, which are run by JMIR Publications in Toronto, Canada….
Rooryck also likes the idea that in Plan P’s proposed manuscript marketplace, a paper’s referee reports are made available to more than one publication—a process often dubbed ‘portable peer review’, that already exists at some journals and publishers to reduce duplication of efforts. A November 2021 study estimated that adopting portable peer review across all journals could save 28 million hours of peer-review time annually, in the United States alone….”