“On January 14, 2019 the entire editorial board of Elsevier’s Journal of Informetrics (JOI) resigned. The editorial board wanted a journal with the same scope and same scientific standards, but owned by the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) (and not by the publisher), open access (instead of toll access) and with open citations. That is why, after resigning from JOI, they launched the new journal Quantitative Science Studies (QSS) with MIT Press [see news of the resignations and launch of the journal at the CWTS website and ISSI website respectively]. MIT Press participates in the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC).
I interviewed Ludo Waltman (professor of Quantitative Science Studies and deputy director at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden University) and Paul Wouters (Dean of the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, former director of CWTS and Open Science Coordinator at Leiden University) about the reasons for their decision and their views on the future of scholarly communication in general. …”
“In this context, a recent initiative in Germany now allows German institutions to publish open access with publishers such as Wiley. The agreement between Projekt DEAL institutions and Wiley is part of a nationally coordinated strategy to enable a large?scale transition of today’s scholarly journals to open access. As of 2019, researchers from Projekt DEAL institutions can now read all Wiley journals and publish their own primary research and review articles open access, retaining copyright of their works. Wiley will not charge fees to authors covered by the agreement. The Publish and Read (PAR) fees and Gold Open Access APC’s related to the agreement will be paid centrally via institutions but might be subject to local institutional arrangements regarding internal allocation.
For authors publishing articles in Bipolar Disorders several additional national Open Access agreements are relevant from countries such as Norway, Hungary, Austria and the Netherlands. The details of these can be found via Wiley Author Services at https://authorservices-wiley-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/author-resources/Journal-Authors/open-access/affiliation-policies-payments/index.html
These models are moving towards making information available freely to everyone, and everyone is essentially paying for it, accepting it as a necessity and human right. Granting bodies are increasingly funding publication and including these costs in their awards. Clearly the journals also benefit as broader access to a larger population will mean greater citations – enhancement of impact….”
“This new challenge [Plan S] causes some concerns to us. This program is unlikely to be equivalent between Europe and the United States8). because key US federal agencies such as National Institute of Health (NIH), mandate a ‘green’ Open Access policy, whereby articles in subscription journals are automatically made available after a 12-month embargo. This policy protects the existing ‘paywalled’ subscription business model. Also, ‘Plan S’ does not allow for scientists to publish their papers in hybrid journals….
One piece of bright news, however, is that Open Access publication fees would be covered by funders or research institutions, not by individual researchers. Although our journal is already Open Access, we have some concerns regarding the publication fee being covered by either researchers or institutions….”
Given that the publishing industry is approaching a new era in which 85% or more of journals are Open Access, it is necessary for us to develop a survival strategy against this coming fierce competition….
Abstract: Transparency, openness, and reproducibility are important characteristics in scientific publishing. Although many researchers embrace these characteristics, data sharing has yet to become common practice. Nevertheless, data sharing is becoming an increasingly important topic among societies, publishers, researchers, patient advocates, and funders, especially as it pertains to data from clinical trials. In response, ASTRO developed a data policy and guide to best practices for authors submitting to its journals. ASTRO’s data sharing policy is that authors should indicate, in data availability statements, if the data are being shared and if so, how the data may be accessed.
Abstract: In 2014, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) founded the first open access journal focusing on heart failure, called ESC Heart Failure (ESC?HF). In the first 5 years, in ESC?HF we published more than 450 articles. Through ESC?HF, the HFA gives room for heart failure research output from around the world. A transfer process from the European Journal of Heart Failure to ESC?HF has also been installed. As a consequence, in 2018 ESC?HF received 289 submissions, and published 148 items (acceptance rate 51%). The journal is listed in Scopus since 2014 and on the PubMed website since 2015. In 2019, we received our first impact factor from ISI Web of Knowledge / Thomson?Reuters, which is 3.407 for 2018. This report reviews which papers get best cited. Not surprisingly, many of the best cited papers are reviews and facts & numbers mini reviews, but original research is also well cited.
“Preprint repositories have traditionally served as platforms to share copies of working papers prior to publication. But today they are being used for so much more, like posting datasets, archiving final versions of articles to make them Green Open Access, and another major development — publishing academic journals. Over the past 20 years, the concept of overlay publishing, or layering journals on top of existing repository platforms, has developed from a pilot project idea to a recognized and growing publishing model.
In the overlay publishing model, a journal performs refereeing services, but it doesn’t publish articles on its website. Rather, the journal’s website links to final article versions hosted on an online repository….”
“When The British Blockchain Association decided to launch JBBA and began looking for the best means to publish the journal, Naqvi said he and his team were more concerned with soliciting quality articles and reaching the widest audience possible than with working with a known publisher. “Reputable publishers may impress some people but the majority of people are more interested in the quality of contents within the journal than who the publisher is,” explained Naqvi….”
Abstract: BMC Medicine was launched in November 2003 as an open access, open peer-reviewed general medical journal that has a broad remit to publish “outstanding and influential research in all areas of clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities”. Here, I discuss the last 15?years of epidemiological research published by BMC Medicine, with a specific focus on how this reflects changes occurring in the field of epidemiology over this period; the impact of ‘Big Data’; the reinvigoration of debates about causality; and, as we increasingly work across and with many diverse disciplines, the use of the name ‘population health science’. Reviewing all publications from the first volume to the end of 2018, I show that most BMC Medicine papers are epidemiological in nature, and the majority of them are applied epidemiology, with few methodological papers. Good research must address important translational questions that should not be driven by the increasing availability of data, but should take appropriate advantage of it. Over the next 15?years it would be good to see more publications that integrate results from several different methods, each with different sources of bias, in a triangulation framework.
“The articles in the ARCDB [Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology] are not yet open access, but Annual Reviews (AR) is exploring free online access options without passing on fees to authors. Recently, AR received a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to make the Annual Review of Public Health open access. Open access to this journal launched in April 2017, and it was followed by a huge increase in usage. For example, there were 23,456 downloads from 56 countries in May 2016, before the content became open access. In May 2019, this had increased to 189,508 downloads from 137 countries. This success encouraged AR to explore sustainable open access publishing models for the entire series through an initiative called “Subscribe to Open,” which relies on the buy-in by libraries to continue to defray the cost of publication and thereby enable open access for all. Thus a benefit for all is accomplished by serving libraries’ and institutions’ interests in providing access to their researchers. As a nonprofit organization, AR operates on a balanced budget where revenues need to closely match expenditure. Thus, for AR to go open access, the Subscribe to Open model requires all libraries that presently purchase access to continue to subscribe to the series. It cannot tolerate free riders, as Subscribe to Open is financially viable only with full participation from all subscribing institutions (possibly with a dynamic price scale dependent on the size of the user pool). Other options have been discussed, but independence of the journal content and a guarantee of high quality of production, while avoiding charges to the authors, remain a priority….”
“Many OA journals are published in the world, but for the time being, only a few have implemented Plan S.8 I am pleased to inform you that The IJOEM, a platinum OA journal, is the only medical journal in the rejoin that has implemented Plan S. This implementation is, indeed, in line with our primary mission to provide free access to quality scientific materials for all people throughout the world….”