“Community abstracts are now mandatory for accepted submissions to JAMIA Open. Community abstracts support a key goal in dissemination of published work to the stakeholders that have the most to gain– the patients. I acknowledge the challenge for many of us who spend our time writing and communicating to research audiences to write Community Abstracts. However, for our field to have the most impact, we must convey our work to the greater community. Community understanding for our findings and innovations in leveraging informatics approaches to improve health and health care is a crucial first step toward building a foundation for reproducibility. That is, if a patient understands work presented in a publication, they should expect that it can be reproduced for themselves.
Reproducibility is on equal footing with rigor in terms of importance in the pursuit of knowledge. Many funding agencies now require explicit description for how proposed work will not only be rigorous but also reproducible. JAMIA Open has strongly encouraged the availability of any associated data (eg, through Dryad) to support reproducibility. Data that are made available through readily accessible, public repositories supports not only verification studies, but can also form the basis for new studies. Data sets can also be enhanced and curated to provide common “benchmark” datasets for algorithm evaluation.
JAMIA Open was established as a Level 1 Data Availability journal, meaning that authors were encouraged to share their data publicly. We are now shifting to be a Level 2 Data Availability journal, meaning that, in addition to sharing data publicly, each publication must include a Data Availability Statement. Of course, the release of data should only be done where ethically possible and in accordance to relevant laws. A description of the Oxford University Press Data Availability policies can be found here: https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/authors/preparing_your_manuscript/research-data-policy….”
“Even though The Journal of Social Psychology was one of the first psychology journals to adopt open science badges (J. E. Grahe, 2014), and the first to require Research Materials Transparency (J. Grahe, 2018), we have resisted requiring Data Transparency. The reasons for this have varied across the years, but most recently we paused for two reasons which I will present momentarily. However, our reasons were generally concerned that early adoption would drive away too many authors and we needed to wait. In the early spring of 2020, the editors once again discussed adopting Data Transparency as a requirement for publication, but again demurred. Though our other concerns were again discussed, the onset of the CV-19 pandemic was our primary caution. In short, we recognized that this decision will require a transition as authors grapple with a new reality of sharing their data as a condition of publication, and we were waiting until the time was right to implement the new rules. Well, the time has come, and this editorial is the announcement that Data Transparency will now be required for publication in The Journal of Social Psychology. Along with a short explanation of the timing, this editorial also describes what is required versus recommended in our new data sharing policy.”
“We live in the age of Big Data, and the current data boom is changing the way we do science. Data can be reanalyzed in new ways contributing to scientific information and knowledge. Accessible data also plays an essential role in encouraging responsible conduct. Researchers are increasingly sharing their data with the research community and Genome fully supports the goal of making research data available and accessible to everyone. Although data sharing is not mandatory for Genome, we do strongly encourage it….”
In January 2016, the three journals of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) transitioned to gold open access.
Increased author charges were introduced to partially offset the loss of subscription revenue.
Submissions to the two established journals initially dropped by almost 15% but have now stabilized.
The transition has not impacted acceptance rates and impact factors, and article pageviews and downloads may have increased as a result of open access.
“However, with the current trends toward depositing new scientific work on pre-print servers, the proliferation of opportunistic for-profit open access journals, and the dizzying array of social media platforms that provide information in real time, I believe that it will be increasingly hard for journals to be all things to all people all of the time. However, that does not mean we should not lean in….
Accordingly, there is still a need today for a medical journal that is completely dedicated to bringing the fruits of fundamental scientific discoveries to patients….”
“We [at Global Health] are committed to removing publication barriers that can disproportionately impact authors based in LMICs. Recognizing that journal fees can be a major impediment to article submission and publication, especially for researchers in LMICs,11 we continue to make GHSP a no-fee, open-access journal. Furthermore, in instances where English language barriers could hinder publication opportunities, our editorial team has worked with authors to address language barriers and is committed to continuing this practice.”
Abstract: Open Access is a simple idea that has resulted in a confusing landscape of business models, competing policy prescriptions, and vested interests. Academic debates about the pros and cons of Open Access publishing often lack insights into the operational needs for setting up an Open Access publication. This is true particularly for the social sciences, where experiences with Open Access from the production side still seem sparse. Covering the period between 2010 and 2015, this article recapitulates one of the few cases where an existing academic journal in political science has been converted to an Open Access publication. The Austrian Journal of Political Science (OZP) is an Open Access journal since 2015; and it was the academic community that conducted the conversion process. Remaking the OZP may thus entail some broader lessons for the social sciences communities about what is important in Open Access publishing.
Abstract: Objective: Publications are the cornerstone of the dissemination of scientific innovation and scholarly work, but published works are mostly behind paywalls. Therefore, many researchers and institutions are searching for alternative models for disseminating scholarly work that bypasses the current structure of paywalls. This study aimed to determine whether a self-published open access (OA) journal, the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS), has been able to reach a global audience in terms of authorship, readership, and impact using the OA model.
Methods: All IJHS articles were retrieved and analyzed using scientometric methods. Using the keywords from abstracts and titles, unsupervised clustering was performed to map research trends. Network analysis was used to chart the network of collaboration. The analysis of articles’ metadata and the visualizations was performed using R programming language.
Results: Using Google Scholar as a source, the general statistics of IJHS from inception to 2019 showed that the average citation per article was 11.29, and the impact factor of the journal was 2.28. The results demonstrate the obvious local and global impact of a locally published journal that allows unrestricted OA and uses an open source publishing platform. The journal’s success at attracting diverse topics, authors, and readers is a testament to the power of the OA model.
Conclusions: Open source is feasible and rewarding and enables a global reach for research from under-represented regions. Local journals can help the Global South disseminate their scholarly work, which is frequently ignored by commercial and established publications.
Abstract: In July, 1995 the first issue of D-Lib Magazine was published as an on-line, HTML-only, open access magazine, serving as the focal point for the then emerging digital library research community. In 2017 it ceased publication, in part due to the maturity of the community it served as well as the increasing availability of and competition from eprints, institutional repositories, conferences, social media, and online journals — the very ecosystem that D-Lib Magazine nurtured and enabled. As long-time members of the digital library community and authors with the most contributions to D-Lib Magazine, we reflect on the history of the digital library community and D-Lib Magazine, taking its very first issue as guidance. It contained three articles, which described: the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, a project status report from the NSF/DARPA/NASA-funded Digital Library Initiative (DLI), and a summary of the Kahn-Wilensky Framework (KWF) which gave us, among other things, Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). These technologies, as well as many more described in D-Lib Magazine through its 23 years, have had a profound and continuing impact on the digital library and general web communities.
“Today we reached a huge milestone at JOSS – we published our 1000th paper! JOSS is a developer friendly, free-to-publish, open-access journal for research software packages. Publishing 1000 papers (and reviewing the corresponding 1000 software packages) over the past ~4 years has been no small feat. This achievement has been possible thanks to the efforts of our journal team and community of reviewers who have all given their time to make JOSS a success. We take this opportunity to review some of what we’ve learnt over the past four years and outline some plans for the future….”