Scientific Online Resource System

Biomedical Reviews

Towards Open Access Scientific Publishing

Stepan G. Akterian

Abstract

Here my aim is to relate, in outline, the two general models for scientific publishing - subscription-based and open access. Accordingly, the features and the ways for realising of two main types of open access publications - Gold open access and Green open access - are described. The quest to know the basic difference between these two types of open access continues. In addressing them I also highlight their current diffusion and some forecasts for their further extension. The open access publishing is a part of the subsequent goal for open science. Altogether, the present review should hopefully help the reader to appreciate what is required to advance knowledge, and how to benefit from open access publishing. Biomed Rev 2017; 28:125-133

Keywords: publishing model, gold open access, green open access, open science, predatory journals


Full Text


References

Ware M, Mabe M. The STM Report. An Overview of Scientific and Scholarly Journal Publishing. The Hague, International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers. 2012.

Hall N. If science is going to save the world, we need to make it open. 2016, accessed on 3.11.17.

Open Society Institute. Budapest Open Access Initiative. Budapest. 2002, accessed on 3.11.17.

Scientists and Scientific Societies Working Group. Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing. Bethesda (USA). 2003; http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm, accessed on 3.11.17.

Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. Berlin. 2003; https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration, accessed on 3.11.17.

Commission recommendation of 17 July 2012 on access to and preservation of scientific information (2012/417/EU). Official J Eur Union, 20 July 2012; 55(L192):39-43.

Academie des sciences, Leopoldina and Royal Society. Statement on scientific publications by three national Academies. 2016; https://www.leopoldina.org/en/press/press-releases/ press-release/press/2451/, accessed on 12.11.17.

Elsevier Publisher. Your Guide to Publishing Open Access with Elsevier. Oxford, 2015; https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access , accessed on 3.11.17.

Esposito P. The size of the open access market. The Scholarly Kitchen. 2014; http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/10/29/the-size-of-the-open-accessmarket. accessed on 20.11.17.

Beall J. Criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers. 2015, accessed on 19.11.17.

Shen C, Björk B. ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Medicine 2015; 13(230):1-15. DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2.

Solomon D, Björk B-C. Publication fees in open access publishing: sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal. JASIST 2012; 63:98–107. DOI:10.1002/ asi.21660.

Manca A, Martinez G, Cugusi L, Dragone D, Dvir Z, Deriu F. The surge of predatory open-access in neurosciences and neurology. Neuroscience 2017; 353:166-173.

Manca A, Martinez G, Cugusi L, Dragone D, Mercuro G, Deriu F. Predatory open access in rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017; 98(5):1051-1056.

Tosti A, Maddy AJ. Ranking predatory journals in dermatology: distinguishing the bad from the ugly. Int J Dermatol 2017; 56(7):718-720.

Hua F, Shen C, Walsh T, Glenny AM, Worthington H. Open access: Concepts findings, and recommendations for stakeholders in dentistry. J Dentistry 2017; 64:13-22.

Johal J, Ward R, Gielecki J, Walocha J, Natsis K, Tubbs RS, et al. Beware of the predatory science journal: A potential threat to the integrity of medical research. Clin Anat 2017; 30(6):767-773.

Knoll JL. Open access journals and forensic publishing. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2014; 42(3):315-321.

Clarivate Analytics. Whitepaper Web of Science: Opening the way to Open Access. Philadelphia, 2017; http://info.clarivate.com/openaccess, accessed on 3.11.17.

Björk B, Welling P, Laakso M, et al. Open access to the scientific journal literature: Situation 2009. PLoS ONE 2010; 5(6): e11273. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0011273

Kraker P, Leony D, Reinhardt W, Reinhardt W. The case for an open science in technology enhanced learning. Int J Technol Enhan Learn 2011; 3(6): 643-654.

Directorate-general for research and innovation of European Commission. Open Science Monitor. https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/index.cfm?pg=home&section=monitor accessed on 12.11.17.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14748/bmr.v28.4459

Refbacks

Article Tools
Email this article (Login required)
About The Author

Stepan G. Akterian
University of Food Technologies, Plovdiv
Bulgaria

Department of Technology of Tobacco, Sugar, Vegetable and Essential Oils

Font Size


|