Dramatic Growth of Open Access December 31, 2017

Highlights

As usual the open access movement has much to celebrate as 2017 draws to a close, and the whole world has much to look forward to from open access in 2018. As of today there are 4.6 million articles in PubMedCentral, thanks in large measure to constantly increasing participation by scholarly journals; sometime in 2018 this is likely to exceed 5 million. DOAJ added a net 1,272 journals (3.5 / day) and showed even stronger growth in article searchability; a DOAJ milestone of 3 million searchable articles in likely to come in 2018. The Directory of Open Access Books nearly doubled in size and now has more than 10,000 books from 247 publishers. Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, the best surrogate for overall growth, continues to amaze with over 120 million documents, growth of 17.3 million in 2017, a 17% growth rate on a very substantial base; a 20% growth in content providers is an indication of the overall growth of the repository movement. arXiv’s growth rate was 10% while newcomer arXiv clones socRxiv grew by 187% and bioRxiv by 151%. REPEC grew by 13%, SCOAP3 by 32%. Internet Archive grew by 31 billion web pages, 4 million texts, 2.4 million images, 800,000 movies, and 600,000 audio recordings. Following are selected details indicating the content numbers at the end of 2017, 2017 growth by number, percentage, and where warranted, by day.

Full data can be downloaded from here: https://dataverse.scholarsportal.info/dataverse/dgoa

Details (selected)

Totals are from December 31, 2017. Annual growth: Dec. 31, 2017 – Dec. 31, 2017

Free journals

Directory of Open Access Journals

10,727 journals

  • 2017 growth: 1,272 journals (3.5 / day), growth rate 13%

7,809 journals searchable at article level

  • 2017 growth:  1,175 (3.2 / day), growth rate 18%

2,791,701 articles searchable at article level

  • 2017 growth: 391,443 (1,072 / day), growth rate 16%

Milestone to watch for in 2018: 3 million articles searchable at article level

Electronic Journals Library 

59,240 journals that can be read free of charge (2017 growth: 3,678 (10 / day), 7% growth)

Free books

OECD ilibrary

11,690 e-book titles (2017 growth 640 (2 / day), growth rate 6%

Directory of Open Access Books

 10,315 academic peer-reviewed books, 247 publishers

  • 2017 growth: 4,713 (13 / day), growth rate 84%, increase of 80 publishers

See also Internet Archive below

    Repositories
    Bielefeld Academic Search Engine

    120,383,423 documents

    • 2017 growth: 17.3 million documents (47,000 / day), growth rate 17%

    6,038 content providers

    • 2017 growth: 1,015 (3 / day), growth rate 20%

    OpenDOAR

    3,464 repositories — 2017 growth 179, (.5 / day), growth rate 5%

    Registry of Open Access Repositories

    4,597 repositories – 2017 growth 232, 1 / day), growth rate 5%

    PubMedCentral

    4.6 million items – 2017 growth 500,000, (1,370 / day), growth rate 12%

    2,446 journals actively participating in PMC – 2017 growth 120, growth rate 5%

    1,832 journals in PMC with immediate free access – 2017 growth 112, growth rate 7%

    1,478 journals in PMC with all articles open access – 2017 growth 52, growth rate 4%

    664 journals in PMC with some articles open access – 2017 growth 95, growth rate 17%

    2,093 full participation journals (deposit ALL articles in PMC) – 2017 growth 120, growth rate 6%

    329 NIH portfolio journals (deposit NIH funded article in PMC) – 2017 growth 5, growth rate 2%

    4,494 selective deposit (deposit some articles in PMC) – 2017 growth 421 (1 / day), growth rate 10%

    33% of articles keyword “cancer” freefulltext within 1 year of publication (41% at 2 years, 45% at 5 years, 26% with no date limiter)

    Milestone to watch for in 2018: 5 million items

    arXiv

    1,342,725 items – 2017 growth 123,501 (338 / day), growth rate 10%

    SocArXiv

    1,814 preprints – 2017 growth 1,183 (3 / day), growth rate 187%

    bioRxiv

    18,822 article – 2017 growth 11,322 (31 / day), growth rate 151%

    RePEC

    2,279,139 downloadable items – 2017 growth 257,605 (706 / day), growth rate 13%

    Internet Archive

    310 billion webpages – 2017 growth 31 billion webpages (85,000 / day), growth rate 11%

    3.8 million video (movies) – 2017 growth 800,000 (2,192 / day), growth rate 27%

    3.8 million audio recordings – 2017 growth 600,000 (1,644 / day), growth rate 19%

    15,000,000 texts – 2017 growth: 4 million (11,000 / day), growth rate 36%

    3.7 million images – 2017 growth: 2.4 million (6,575 / day), growth rate 185%

    SCOAP3

    18,042 articles – 2017 growth: 4,410 (12 / day), growth rate 32%

     This post is part of the Dramatic Growth of Open Access series.

    CIELO – A Collaborative Informatics Environment for Learning on healthcare Outcomes

    “CIELO stands for “Collaborative Informatics Environment for Learning on Health Outcomes” and is a collaborative tool that enables health researchers, data scientists, policy analysts, and citizen scientists to share software and data and connect with peers, colleagues and specialists to improve the timeliness, efficiency and transparency of data analysis….CIELO fosters multi-disciplinary collaboration in health analytics, allowing users to share and collaborate across distributed research activities.

    Access health analytics data and code.

    Connect with health researchers, policy analysts, informaticians, citizen scientists, and others. … “

    The Dutch Approach to Achieving Open Access

    “In this paper, the authors – both of whom are library directors and involved in the contract negotiations with the bigger scientific publishers – present the conditions that formed the Dutch approach in these negotiations. A combination of clear political support, a powerful delegation, a unique bargaining model and fidelity to their principles geared the Dutch to their success in achieving open access. The authors put these joint license and open access negotiations in the perspective of open science and show that they are part of the transition towards open access.”

    Automating semantic publishing – IOS Press

    Abstract: “Semantic Publishing involves the use of Web and Semantic Web technologies and standards for the semantic enhancement of a scholarly work so as to improve its discoverability, interactivity, openness and (re-)usability for both humans and machines. Recently, people have suggested that the semantic enhancements of a scholarly work should be undertaken by the authors of that scholarly work, and should be considered as integral parts of the contribution subjected to peer review. However, this requires that the authors should spend additional time and effort adding such semantic annotations, time that they usually do not have available. Thus, the most pragmatic way to facilitate this additional task is to use automated services that create the semantic annotation of authors’ scholarly articles by parsing the content that they have already written, thus reducing the additional time required of the authors to that for checking and validating these semantic annotations. In this article, I propose a generic approach called compositional and iterative semantic enhancement (CISE) that enables the automatic enhancement of scholarly papers with additional semantic annotations in a way that is independent of the markup used for storing scholarly articles and the natural language used for writing their content.”

    Automating semantic publishing – IOS Press

    Abstract: “Semantic Publishing involves the use of Web and Semantic Web technologies and standards for the semantic enhancement of a scholarly work so as to improve its discoverability, interactivity, openness and (re-)usability for both humans and machines. Recently, people have suggested that the semantic enhancements of a scholarly work should be undertaken by the authors of that scholarly work, and should be considered as integral parts of the contribution subjected to peer review. However, this requires that the authors should spend additional time and effort adding such semantic annotations, time that they usually do not have available. Thus, the most pragmatic way to facilitate this additional task is to use automated services that create the semantic annotation of authors’ scholarly articles by parsing the content that they have already written, thus reducing the additional time required of the authors to that for checking and validating these semantic annotations. In this article, I propose a generic approach called compositional and iterative semantic enhancement (CISE) that enables the automatic enhancement of scholarly papers with additional semantic annotations in a way that is independent of the markup used for storing scholarly articles and the natural language used for writing their content.”

    Data aggregators: a solution to open data issues – Open Knowledge International Blog

    “Open Knowledge International’s report on the state of open data identifies the main problems affecting open government data initiatives. These are: the very low discoverability of open data sources, which were rightfully defined as being “hard or impossible to find”; the lack of interoperability of open data sources, which are often very difficult to be utilised; and the lack of a standardised open license, representing a legal obstacle to data sharing. These problems harm the very essence of the open data movement, which advocates data easy to find, free to access and to be reutilised.  

    In this post, we will argue that data aggregators are a potential solution to the problems mentioned above.  Data aggregators are online platforms which store data of various nature at once central location to be utilised for different purposes. We will argue that data aggregators are, to date, one of the most powerful and useful tools to handle open data and resolve the issues affecting it.

    We will provide the evidence in favour of this argument by observing how FAIR principles, namely Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability, are put into practice by four different data aggregators engineered in Indonesia, Czech Republic, the US and the EU. …”

    Data aggregators: a solution to open data issues – Open Knowledge International Blog

    “Open Knowledge International’s report on the state of open data identifies the main problems affecting open government data initiatives. These are: the very low discoverability of open data sources, which were rightfully defined as being “hard or impossible to find”; the lack of interoperability of open data sources, which are often very difficult to be utilised; and the lack of a standardised open license, representing a legal obstacle to data sharing. These problems harm the very essence of the open data movement, which advocates data easy to find, free to access and to be reutilised.  

    In this post, we will argue that data aggregators are a potential solution to the problems mentioned above.  Data aggregators are online platforms which store data of various nature at once central location to be utilised for different purposes. We will argue that data aggregators are, to date, one of the most powerful and useful tools to handle open data and resolve the issues affecting it.

    We will provide the evidence in favour of this argument by observing how FAIR principles, namely Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability, are put into practice by four different data aggregators engineered in Indonesia, Czech Republic, the US and the EU. …”

    ORA Conference: “Help! I’m an author – get me out of here. A wish list for better research dissemination” – uuid:64bffc9c-a880-47e3-b855-2d0fc4e40928

    Abstract:  The current UK open access (OA) environment is extremely complex, and the concept of OA as a ‘good thing’ is being lost. Inefficient processes are unavoidable; an astonishing amount of money is changing hands; numerous new journals are being produced; OA policies and funding are regularly reviewed and open to change; and all the while, research dissemination is evolving. Authors are caught in the middle of a complicated, and sometimes conflicting, mixture of requirements from funders and publishers. Many researchers want to use new models to distribute their findings and discuss them with peers. University research support staff attempt to filter policy requirements and simplify instructions and procedures for authors, whilst supporting them in using all forms of dissemination. This presentation focuses on the difficulties encountered when managing OA support for researchers within a large research-intensive institution, and challenges publishers with a wish list.