Science Editing

Original Article

Changes in the absolute numbers and proportions of open access articles from 2000 to 2021 based on the Web of Science Core Collection: a bibliometric study: Jeong-Wook Seo; Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):45-56. Published online February 16, 2023; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.296

2,978 View
262 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose: The ultimate goal of current open access (OA) initiatives is for library services to use OA resources. This study aimed to assess the infrastructure for OA scholarly information services by tabulating the number and proportion of OA articles in a literature database.
Methods
We measured the absolute numbers and proportions of OA articles at different time points across various disciplines based on the Web of Science (WoS) database.
Results
The number (proportion) of available OA articles between 2000 and 2021 in the WoS database was 12 million (32.4%). The number (proportion) of indexed OA articles in 1 year was 0.15 million (14.6%) in 2000 and 1.5 million (48.0%) in 2021. The proportion of OA by subject categories in the cumulative data was the highest in the multidisciplinary category (2000–2021, 79%; 2021, 89%), high in natural sciences (2000–2021, 21%–46%; 2021, 41%–62%) and health and medicine (2000–2021, 37%–40%; 2021, 52%–60%), and low in social sciences and others (2000–2021, 23%–32%; 2021, 36%–44%), engineering (2000–2021, 17%–33%; 2021, 31%–39%) and humanities and arts (2000–2021, 11%–22%; 2021, 28%–38%).
Conclusion
Our study confirmed that increasingly many OA research papers have been published in the last 20 years, and the recent data show considerable promise for better services in the future. The proportions of OA articles differed among scholarly disciplines, and designing library services necessitates several considerations with regard to the customers’ demands, available OA resources, and strategic approaches to encourage the use of scholarly OA articles.

Training Material

The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals: Pippa Smart; Sci Ed. 2022;9(1):79-84. Published online February 20, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.269

5,004 View
309 Download
8 Web of Science
12 Crossref

This article presents the growth and development of preprints to help authors, editors, and publishers understand and adopt appropriate strategies for incorporating preprints within their scholarly communication strategies. The article considers: preprint history and evolution, integration of preprints and journals, and the benefits and disadvantages, and challenges that preprints offer. The article discusses the two largest and most established preprint servers, arXiv.org (established in 1991) and SSRN (1994), the OSF (Open Science Foundation) initiative that supported preprint growth (2010), bioRxiv (2013), and medRxiv (2019). It then discusses six different levels of acceptance of preprints within journals: uneasy relationship, acceptance of preprint articles, encouraging authors to preprint their articles, active participation with preprints, submerger by reviewing preprints, and finally merger and overlay models. It is notable that most journals now accept submissions that have been posted as preprints. The benefits of preprints include fast circulation, priority publication, increased visibility, community feedback, and contribution to open science. Disadvantages include information overload, inadequate quality assurance, citation dilution, information manipulation and inflation of results. As preprints become mainstream it is likely that they will benefit authors but disadvantage publishers and journals. Authors are encouraged to preprint their own articles but to be cautious about using preprints as the basis for their own research. Editors are encouraged to develop preprint policies and be aware that double-blind review is not possible with preprinting of articles and that allowing citations to preprints is to be encouraged. In conclusion, journal-related stakeholders should consider preprints as an unavoidable development, taking into consideration both the benefits and disadvantages.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Seeing the forest for the trees and the changing seasons in the vast land of scholarly publishing
Soo Jung Shin
Science Editing.2024; 11(1): 81. CrossRef
To preprint or not to preprint: A global researcher survey
Rong Ni, Ludo Waltman
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Open publishing of public health research in Africa: an exploratory investigation of the barriers and solutions
Pasipanodya Ian Machingura Ruredzo, Dominic Dankwah Agyei, Modibo Sangare, Richard F. Heller
Insights the UKSG journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles
Sun Huh
Neurointervention.2023; 18(1): 2. CrossRef
Most Preprint Servers Allow the Publication of Opinion Papers
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Serhii Nazarovets
Open Information Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The rise of preprints in earth sciences
Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
F1000Research.2023; 12: 561. CrossRef
The rise of preprints in earth sciences
Olivier Pourret, Daniel Enrique Ibarra
F1000Research.2023; 12: 561. CrossRef
Sharing the wealth: a proposal for discipline-based repositories of shared educational resources
Ellen Austin
Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education.2023; 27(4): 131. CrossRef
The experiences of COVID-19 preprint authors: a survey of researchers about publishing and receiving feedback on their work during the pandemic
Narmin Rzayeva, Susana Oliveira Henriques, Stephen Pinfield, Ludo Waltman
PeerJ.2023; 11: e15864. CrossRef
An attempt to explain the partial 'silent' withdrawal or retraction of a SAGE Advance preprint
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
Publishing Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review
Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Beth Giddins, Robin Haunschild
PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291627. CrossRef
Dissemination of Registered COVID-19 Clinical Trials (DIRECCT): a cross-sectional study
Maia Salholz-Hillel, Molly Pugh-Jones, Nicole Hildebrand, Tjada A. Schult, Johannes Schwietering, Peter Grabitz, Benjamin Gregory Carlisle, Ben Goldacre, Daniel Strech, Nicholas J. DeVito
BMC Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef

Original Article

Preprint acceptance policies of Asian academic society journals in 2020: Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2021;8(1):10-17. Published online February 20, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.224

4,433 View
131 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose: In the current era of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the trend of sharing new research results through preprint platforms is receiving more attention from researchers than ever before. Preprints have been recognized as a primary and essential method to disseminate new findings faster than traditional publications. Therefore, it has become necessary for journals and editors to acknowledge these changes, prepare preprint policies, and notify authors accordingly. This study aimed to review the status of preprint policies of international publishers and Asian academic society journals.
Methods
In total, 383 Asian academic society journals registered in Science Citation Index Expanded were selected as a dataset for analysis between December 11, 2020 and January 8, 2021. Three different parameters were investigated whether each journal had a preprint policy, whether journals allowed preprint manuscripts to be submitted, and whether preprint articles were allowed to be included in the references.
Results
Among the 383 Asian academic society journals from 22 countries, only 28 journals accepted preprint manuscripts, and eight allowed the use of preprint manuscripts as references. Japan had the most journals that both had preprint policies and accepted preprint manuscripts, with 13 journals, followed by Korea with 10 journals.
Conclusion
Despite the limitations of this study, the results show that editors and journal staff should understand the current preprint trend and try to prepare preprint policies that best meet the journals’ and authors’ interests.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 76(1): 3. CrossRef
The use and acceptability of preprints in health and social care settings: A scoping review
Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Beth Giddins, Robin Haunschild
PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291627. CrossRef
Promotion to Top-Tier Journal and Development Strategy of the Annals of Laboratory Medicine for Strengthening its Leadership in the Medical Laboratory Technology Category: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Annals of Laboratory Medicine.2022; 42(3): 321. CrossRef
The evolution, benefits, and challenges of preprints and their interaction with journals
Pippa Smart
Science Editing.2022; 9(1): 79. CrossRef
Congratulations on Child Health Nursing Research becoming a PubMed Central journal and reflections on its significance
Sun Huh
Child Health Nursing Research.2022; 28(1): 1. CrossRef
Korean editors’ and researchers’ experiences with preprints and attitudes towards preprint policies
Hyun Jung Yi, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2021; 8(1): 4. CrossRef
Document Network and Conceptual and Social Structures of Clinical Endoscopy from 2015 to July 2021 Based on the Web of Science Core Collection: A Bibliometric Study
Sun Huh
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 641. CrossRef

Reviews

Overview of disciplinary data sharing practices and promotion of open data in science: Jihyun Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(1):3-9. Published online February 20, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.149

5,903 View
193 Download
8 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Abstract PDF

The present study specifies the historical development of data sharing practices in three disciplines—oceanography, ecology, and genomics—along with the evolving progress of movements—e-Science, cyberinfrastructure, and open science—that expedite data sharing in more diverse disciplines. The review of these disciplinary data-sharing practices and the movements suggests opportunities and challenges that would serve as a basis for implementing data-sharing practices. The increasing need for large-scale and interdisciplinary research provides momentum for initiating data sharing. In addition, the development of data repositories and standards for metadata and data format facilitates data sharing. However, challenges need to be addressed, in regard to conflicting issues of patenting data, concerns about privacy and confidentiality, and informed consent that adequately enables data sharing. It is also necessary to consider the needs of the various stakeholders involved in data sharing to incentivize them to improve its impact.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Korean scholarly journal editors’ and publishers’ attitudes towards journal data sharing policies and data papers (2023): a survey-based descriptive study
Hyun Jun Yi, Youngim Jung, Hyekyong Hwang, Sung-Nam Cho
Science Editing.2023; 10(2): 141. CrossRef
Deep learning-empowered crop breeding: intelligent, efficient and promising
Xiaoding Wang, Haitao Zeng, Limei Lin, Yanze Huang, Hui Lin, Youxiong Que
Frontiers in Plant Science.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Corporate Data Sharing, Leakage, and Supervision Mechanism Research
Haifei Yu, Xinyu He
Sustainability.2021; 13(2): 931. CrossRef
Scientific Cooperation: Supporting Circumpolar Permafrost Monitoring and Data Sharing
Troy J. Bouffard, Ekaterina Uryupova, Klaus Dodds, Vladimir E. Romanovsky, Alec P. Bennett, Dmitry Streletskiy
Land.2021; 10(6): 590. CrossRef
Understanding Research Data Repositories as Infrastructures
Ceilyn Boyd
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2021; 58(1): 25. CrossRef
Bringing Code to Data: Do Not Forget Governance
Christine Suver, Adrian Thorogood, Megan Doerr, John Wilbanks, Bartha Knoppers
Journal of Medical Internet Research.2020; 22(7): e18087. CrossRef
Recent trends in medical journals’ data sharing policies and statements of data availability
Sun Huh
Archives of Plastic Surgery.2019; 46(06): 493. CrossRef

Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information: Jeong-Wook Seo, Hosik Chung, Tae-Sul Seo, Youngim Jung, Eun Seong Hwang, Cheol-Heui Yun, Hyungsun Kim; Sci Ed. 2017;4(2):58-69. Published online August 16, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.97; Correction in: Sci Ed 2018;5(2):171

16,892 View
228 Download
6 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF

The current statistic data on the open access (OA) journals and institutional repositories show some successes and increased awareness on OA in Asian countries. There are several concerns, however, in regards to the access and use of articles by researchers together with the continued increase of libraries’ expenditure for journals. In the present article we introduce five solutions in the global and local perspectives. OA2020 initiative is a global initiative to transform existing journals to OA. Although the practical process of OA2020 remains a challenge, the transformation will increase OA without significant increase of journals and budgets for publishing. The promotion of the local and Asian journals is the second big challenge. Because these local or Asian journals still have important roles in the local research community, they should keep current publishing model of OA at the low cost but with high quality and the better access. The restructuring of the current library budget is the third challenge. The budget for periodicals should be reduced and the saved budget can be used to pay articles processing charge for OA and for purchasing monographs. The fourth important issue is ‘the digital blind spot at the young unemployed and retired elderly’. These groups of poorly supported and potentially important researchers have to be considered as a priority issue to the policies on OA and scholarly knowledge. Lastly, we believe there should be different needs for other activities: optimization of the searchable database, governmental policy on open science and international cooperation on OA.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Changes in the absolute numbers and proportions of open access articles from 2000 to 2021 based on the Web of Science Core Collection: a bibliometric study
Jeong-Wook Seo
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 45. CrossRef
“I Am in a Privileged Situation”: Examining the Factors Promoting Inequity in Open Access Publishing
Philips Ayeni
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology.2023; 60(1): 521. CrossRef
El acceso al conocimiento un derecho universal: las implicaciones sobre la gobernanza de ecosistemas de acceso abierto
Wilson López López
Universitas Psychologica.2019; 18(5): 1. CrossRef
Journal metrics of Clinical and Molecular Hepatology based on the Web of Science Core Collection
Sun Huh
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2018; 24(2): 137. CrossRef
Why and how do we keep editing local medical journals in an era of information overload?
Viera Wardhani, Sam Mathew, Jeong-Wook Seo, Komang G. Wiryawan, Vivi Setiawaty, Burmaajav Badrakh
Science Editing.2018; 5(2): 150. CrossRef
Recent advances of medical journals in Korea and and further development strategies: Is it possible for them to publish Nobel Prize-winning research?
Sun Huh
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2018; 61(9): 524. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search