EN

Comparing companion open access journals to their traditional journal counterparts

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Alexander Pohlman, Ayham M. Odeh, Shawn M. Purnell, Layan Alrahmani, Shanda H Blackmon, Julia M Coughlin, Zaid M Abdelsattar

Background

Many traditional journals have launched companion open access (cOA) journals with similar scope and aims. These journals seek better article dissemination through removal of the paywall and use of article processing charges (APCs). Traditional journals often suggest transfer to their cOA journal, leaving authors with a decision to accept transfer and pay an APC or resubmit elsewhere. We aim to compare costs and impact of these journals to better inform authors.

Methods

The top 15 U.S.-based traditional journals within medicine, surgery, pediatrics, and OB/GYN were identified based on 2023 impact factor. Those with cOA journals were included, and all publication data between 2011 and 2023 were extracted. Citation counts were compared using Poisson regression; author demographics were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

There were 14 traditional journals with cOA counterparts, constituting 52,232 publications from 36,577 authors. cOA articles had half the citations of traditional publications (9.4 vs 18.2) and collected an estimated $35 million in APCs. Female and low/middle income country (LMIC) authors were more likely to publish in cOA journals (aOR = 1.23, 1.14, respectively).

URL : Comparing companion open access journals to their traditional journal counterparts

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2575211

EN

APC waivers and Ukraine’s publishing output in Gold OA journals: Evidence from five commercial publishers

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Serhii Nazarovets

This study examines the effect of article processing charge (APC) waivers on the participation of Ukrainian researchers in fully Gold Open Access (Gold OA) journals published by the five largest academic publishers – Elsevier, SAGE, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley – during the period 2019-2024.

These publishers were selected because, in response to the full-scale war launched against Ukraine in 2022, all five introduced emergency 100% APC-waiver policies for Ukrainian authors. Using bibliometric data from the Web of Science Core Collection, the study analyses publication trends in Ukrainian-authored articles in fully Gold OA journals of these publishers before and after 2022.

The results show a marked post-2022 increase in Ukraine’s Gold OA output, particularly in journals published by Springer Nature and Elsevier. Disciplinary and publisher-specific patterns are evident, with especially strong growth in the medical and applied sciences. The findings underscore the potential of targeted support measures during times of crisis, while also illustrating the inherent limitations of APC-based publishing models in fostering equitable scholarly communication.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2505.12134

EN

Collective funding models for open access books: Librarians’ experiences and barriers to participation across six European contexts

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Judith Fathallah, Joe Deville, Izabella Penier, Francesca Corazza

This report seeks to understand librarians’ experiences of collective funding models for open access books, especially barriers to joining organisations like the Open Book Collective (OBC).

The OBC is one of an increasing number of organisations that are using a collective ‘Diamond’ funding model for open access, wherein libraries commit to financially support open access book publishers, and/or open infrastructure providers for a set period of time to fund their work.

The report aims to learn from differing experiences in countries with different open access policies and institutional contexts. It focuses its research on six countries in continental Europe: Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden. The research includes interviews with 20 participants. Most are librarians, alongside a selection of publishers and open access experts.

It provides particular insight into how librarians understand collective funding models and their ability to become involved in them, within their national and institutional settings. This is supplemented by an analysis of existing research on collective funding models and a profile of each country’s current open access publishing context, based on an extensive literature review.

The report will be of interest to librarians seeking to build further capacity to support collective Diamond open access funding models within their institutions, as well as publishers, infrastructure providers and collaborative endeavours seeking to build collective support for the development of open access programmes.

URL : Collective funding models for open access books: Librarians’ experiences and barriers to participation across six European contexts

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17339946

EN

Determinants of Scientific Article Publication Among Peruvian Physicians and Orthopedic Residents

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Rodrigo Alejandro-Salinas, Diego A. Maticorena-Quevedo,  Alfonso Barnechea-Rey, Percy Herrera-Añazco, Vicente A. Benites-Zapata

Background 

Orthopedic scientific publications play an important role worldwide. Because of the limited evidence in the Latin American literature, we aimed to evaluate the determinants of scientific publication among Peruvian orthopedics as an approach to the Latin American context.

Methods

Analytical cross-sectional study. Orthopedic specialists and residents were enrolled during the 52nd Peruvian National Congress of Orthopedics and Traumatology. A form validated by experts was applied to collect variables. The crude and adjusted coefficients were calculated using bivariate and multivariate regression with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

A total of 310 participants were included in our study. The prevalence of the scientific orthopedic publication was 34.84%. Multivariate regression showed that, working in a private hospitals, having an interest in tumors and pediatric orthopedics, being involved in teaching activity, belonging to a scientific society other than the Peruvian Society of Orthopedics and Traumatology, having more than one research project, having an international rotation, and active participation in meetings were factors associated with publishing orthopedic scientific articles, while coming from a university in the highlands as an undergraduate and having more than ten shifts per month was associated with publishing fewer scientific articles. Among residents, having had an international rotation was associated with publishing scientific articles. Conclusions: The determinants of scientific production described will serve to increase scientific production in different contexts considering the orthopedist’s training stage.

URL : Determinants of Scientific Article Publication Among Peruvian Physicians and Orthopedic Residents

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13040052

 

EN

Global Open Research Commons: Enabling Curation for the Next 20 Years

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Andrew Treloar, C. J. Woodford

This paper addresses the requirements for long-term preservation through a system lens. Rather than focussing on specific technical elements that are needed for curation, this paper considers all the system elements that need to be put in place, and intentionally maintained, to ensure curation for the long term.

This paper begins by making the argument that curation requires attention to preservation over time. The need for preservation, in turn, requires both sustainable data content and sustained infrastructure. These infrastructures consist of many elements, both social and technical, all of which need attention.

Then, this paper briefly introduces the concept of the open research commons as a way of conceptualising these elements, before examining in some detail the Global Open Research Commons (GORC) typology of essential elements. This work was developed through a Research Data Alliance Working Group, which started with a definition of a commons as ‘a global trusted ecosystem that provides seamless access to high-quality interoperable research outputs and services.’ The essential elements in the typology include Information and Communications Technology (ICT) infrastructure, services and tools, research objects, human capacity, rules of participation and access, governance, engagement, and sustainability.

This general approach was then extended by the GORC International Model Working Group to ‘review and identify attributes or features currently implemented by a target set of GORC organisations.’ The GORC approach has already been used in designing the creation of new commons, characterising existing research infrastructures, and analysing interoperability between commons. Future work, to commence in 2025, will clarify how the International Model might be used and adopted, as well as improve how it is presented.

Our researchers require ongoing access to reliable and sustainable data aggregations. These will need to be curated for reuse and interoperability over the long term to support the integrity of the scholarly record. The GORC groups are working towards an interoperable set of platforms that together build on advances in internet technologies and the consensus and strengths of the research community.

URL : Global Open Research Commons: Enabling Curation for the Next 20 Years

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v19i1.1054

EN

An Exploration of the Functionality and Usability of Open Research Platforms to Support Open Science

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Whitney Thompson, Angela Murillo

This paper examines the user experience and functionality of four open research platforms – Zenodo, Figshare, OSF, and Authorea – to assess their utility in disseminating research outputs that are varied in form as well as academic discipline, and in facilitating collaboration on larger projects by multi-institutional groups.

The researchers analysed the platforms’ community features, record creation processes (including metadata fields), search functionality, and analytics capabilities.

URL : An Exploration of the Functionality and Usability of Open Research Platforms to Support Open Science

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v19i1.941

EN

Exploring how the public “see” scientists: A systematic literature review, 1983–2024

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Weiping Wang, Hongxuan Ji, Ying Wang, Zhisen Wang

The public image of scientists significantly influences scientific literacy, science education, professional identity, science communication, and societal attitudes toward public issues. However, there has not been a thorough and detailed review of this topic. This paper presents a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) of 233 high-quality articles examining public perceptions of scientists.

The findings indicate that studies emphasize vivid and emotionally engaging characteristics of scientists, reflecting contemporary trends, particularly during the pandemic. Research predominantly targets students across various educational levels, highlighting a gap between science education and science communication, with a reliance on quantitative methods despite the use of visualization tools.

Key research limitations include a lack of humanistic perspective, issues with validity and reproducibility, insufficient cultural context analysis, weak causal inferences, and limited integration of artificial intelligence and big data, which impede advancements in science education.

The paper concludes with recommendations for developing a more comprehensive conceptual framework to bridge the gaps between science education and communication, as well as their relationship with science teaching, in order to foster a positive public understanding of science.

URL : Exploring how the public “see” scientists: A systematic literature review, 1983–2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05869-7