Science Editing

Original Articles

Trends in scientific output on open science and open access (2015–2024): a bibliometric study: María del Pilar Castro Arellano, Jesús Enrique Quezada Castro; Received December 9, 2025 Accepted January 6, 2026 Published online February 24, 2026; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.398 [Epub ahead of print]

1,052 View
29 Download

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material: Purpose
Open science is a phenomenon that promotes transparency and collaboration in knowledge generation. However, its adoption remains uneven, and the field is still undergoing consolidation. The objective of this bibliometric study was to map trends in scientific production related to open science and open access.
Methods
The PRISMA statement was applied, and predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to guide study selection. A total of 1,826 documents published between 2015 and 2024 were retrieved from the Scopus database. Data processing and analysis were conducted using the Biblioshiny interface.
Results
Scientific output demonstrated an annual growth rate of 24.1%. Articles, conference papers, and reviews were identified as the preferred publication formats. Canada, Italy, and the United States emerged as leading countries in the promotion of collaborative research networks. The most frequently occurring keywords included open science, open access, open data, data sharing, reproducibility, and scholarly communication. A thematic evolution was observed, shifting from an initial educational focus toward increased emphasis on technological applications.
Conclusion
Over the past decade, scientific output related to open science and open access has increased steadily and has been disseminated through multidisciplinary sources. This trend reflects the ongoing transformation of scientific communication and highlights opportunities for publishers to implement policies that support open knowledge dissemination. Publications appearing in Q1 Scopus journals demonstrated strong reliability in knowledge dissemination.

Trends in publications on scientific misconduct from 2000 to 2024: a Scopus-based bibliometric study: Jesús Enrique Quezada Castro, María del Pilar Quezada Castro; Sci Ed. 2026;13(1):14-21. Published online January 29, 2026; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.389

796 View
65 Download

Abstract PDF: Purpose
Scientific research is intended to be a transparent and reproducible process. However, scientific misconduct distorts reality and presents fraudulent findings as truth. This bibliometric study aimed to map trends in scientific output and to identify the leading authors, journals, keywords, and documents addressing scientific misconduct between 2000 and 2024.
Methods
Scientific production indexed in the Scopus database was analyzed. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 3,536 documents were selected. The data were processed using Biblioshiny and Microsoft Excel.
Results
The annual growth rate of publications on scientific misconduct was estimated at 5.33%, with 2024 recording the highest number of indexed documents in Scopus. Collaboration networks were led by the United States, the United Kingdom, and China. The most frequently used keywords were research integrity and scientific misconduct. Retraction was identified as a key control mechanism adopted by journals to uphold research ethics.
Conclusion
Over the past 4 years, scientific output on scientific misconduct has increased, with Q1 Scopus journals playing a central role in establishing international standards for detecting and eliminating research fraud.

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports: Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2020;7(1):24-33. Published online February 20, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.186

11,129 View
154 Download
10 Web of Science
10 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
The “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” are of increasing importance in an open science environment as a way to increase the transparency and quality of academic society journals. However, little previous research has investigated the application of this new guideline in practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree to which this guideline is being applied by Korean academic society– published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports.
Methods
The researchers investigated the homepages of 59 Korean academic society– published journals to evaluate whether they had adopted the 33 items listed in the guideline. Based on the information available on the journals’ homepages, each item was classified as ‘yes’ or ‘no’ within the four categories of basic journal information, publication ethics, copyright and archiving information, and profit model.
Results
The basic journal information category was generally well-practiced, with the exceptions of the peer review process, readership, and author fees. The copyright and licensing information category was also well-practiced, with the exception of policies on posting accepted articles with third parties and archiving items. However, most items in the publication ethics category were not well practiced, with the exception of authorship and intellectual property. All items in the profit model category were infrequently implemented.
Conclusion
These findings serve as a good indicator for Korean journal editors of areas for improvement. It may be helpful to review journals’ publication policies and homepages to comply with international publishing standards.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Транспарентность в научных журналах по био- и пищевым технологиям: сравнительный анализ редакционных политик на основе принципов COPE, OASPA, WAME и DOAJ
М. А. Косычева
Научный редактор и издатель.2025; 9(2): 179. CrossRef
Conformity with Publication Ethics Guidelines among Nigerian Medical Journals
Adaora A Onyiaorah, Euzebus C Ezugwu
Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics.2025; 20(4): 250. CrossRef
The COPE / DOAJ / OASPA / WAME Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing: A Critical Analysis
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Salim Moussa
ETHICS IN PROGRESS.2024; 15(1): 130. CrossRef
The Application of Open Science Potentials in Research Processes: A Comprehensive Literature Review
Maryam Zarghani, Leila Nemati-Anaraki, Shahram Sedghi, Abdolreza Noroozi Chakoli, Anisa Rowhani-Farid
Libri.2023; 73(2): 167. 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
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
Marking the inclusion of the Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing in PubMed Central and strategies to be promoted to a top-tier journal in the nursing category
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing.2022; 28(3): 165. 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
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. CrossRef

Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in academic society published journals: Hyung Wook Choi, Ye Jin Choi, Soon Kim; Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):112-121. Published online August 19, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.171

10,978 View
155 Download
15 Web of Science
19 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
Four international associations, including the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Committee on Publication Ethics, and the World Association of Medical Editors declared the third version of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” to ensure transparency and quality in journal publications. This study is aimed at assessing the guidelines from the journals’ websites manually.
Methods
In this study, three researchers investigate the homepages of 781 academic society-published journals that are registered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and whether these journals are effectively adopting these new guidelines. In this paper, 33 items from the guidelines are examined. The 33 items are rearranged into four different categories: basic journal information; publication ethics; copyright and archiving information; and profit model. The researchers count yes or no after checking the adopting status on the journal homepage and dividing into four scales: 0% to 25% for is rarely practiced, 26% to 50% for is poorly practiced, 51% to 75% for is adequately practiced, and 76% to 100% for is well practiced.
Results
Of the 33 items, 10 are found to be poorly or rarely practiced, including readership, data sharing, archiving policies, and profit model information.
Conclusion
It could be the most up-to-date indicator of the current status of applying best practice guidelines. Society journal editors especially from Asia should evaluate their journals regarding “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing”.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The NIAID Discovery Portal: a unified search engine for infectious and immune-mediated disease datasets
Ginger Tsueng, Emily Bullen, Candice Czech, Dylan Welzel, Leandro Collares, Jason Lin, Everaldo Rodolpho, Zubair Qazi, Nichollette Acosta, Lisa M. Mayer, Sudha Venkatachari, Zorana Mitrović Vučičević, Poromendro N. Burman, Deepti Jain, Jack DiGiovanna, Ma
mSystems.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Trust, Transparency, and Accountability: The Three Pillars of Ethical Scholarly Publishing
Kaushik Bharati
Trends in Scholarly Publishing.2026; 5(1): 49. CrossRef
Транспарентность в научных журналах по био- и пищевым технологиям: сравнительный анализ редакционных политик на основе принципов COPE, OASPA, WAME и DOAJ
М. А. Косычева
Научный редактор и издатель.2025; 9(2): 179. CrossRef
Conformity with Publication Ethics Guidelines among Nigerian Medical Journals
Adaora A Onyiaorah, Euzebus C Ezugwu
Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics.2025; 20(4): 250. CrossRef
Opening up to the open data
Prakash K. Dubey
Journal of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences.2024; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
The COPE / DOAJ / OASPA / WAME Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing: A Critical Analysis
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Salim Moussa
ETHICS IN PROGRESS.2024; 15(1): 130. CrossRef
Journal Data Accessibility Policies: Challenges and Opportunities
Elena V. Tikhonova, Marina A. Kosycheva
Health, Food & Biotechnology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Prestige of scholarly book publishers—An investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries
Eleonora Dagienė
Research Evaluation.2023; 32(2): 356. CrossRef
The use of data repositories in dermatology
Umer Nadir, Loma Dave, Michael D. Yi, Farhana Ikmal Hisham, Murad Alam
Archives of Dermatological Research.2023; 315(6): 1851. 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
Cumplimiento de Estándares Internacionales en Publicaciones Arbitradas Académicas Mexicanas y Guatemaltecas
Humberto Emilio Aguilera Arévalo
Revista Académica Sociedad del Conocimiento Cunzac.2022; 2(1): 89. CrossRef
Open Data Policies among Library and Information Science Journals
Brian Jackson
Publications.2021; 9(2): 25. 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
The Journal Citation Indicator has arrived for Emerging Sources Citation Index journals, including the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, in June 2021
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 20. CrossRef
Changes in bibliographic information associated with Korean scientific journals from 2011 to 2019
Yoon Joo Seo, Hye-Min Cho, Sun Huh
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 11. CrossRef
Compliance of “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing” in Korean academic society-published journals listed in Journal Citation Reports
Ye Jin Choi, Hyung Wook Choi, Soon Kim
Science Editing.2020; 7(1): 24. CrossRef
Position of Ultrasonography in the scholarly journal network based on bibliometrics and developmental strategies for it to become a top-tier journal
Sun Huh
Ultrasonography.2020; 39(3): 238. CrossRef
How Annals of Dermatology Has Improved the Scientific Quality and Ethical Standards of its Articles in the Two-Year Period since October 2018
Sun Huh
Annals of Dermatology.2020; 32(5): 353. 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

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search