Wojick, M., Conner, H., Farley, A., Huaman, E., Luyo, M., Thomas-Pate, S., & LaGrone, L. (2024). Access to evidence-based care: A systematic review of trauma and surgical literature costs across resource settings. Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open, 9(1), e001238. https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2023-001238
New study: When the journal, Neuropsychopharmacology, studied its own articles (a mix of #GreenOA, #GoldOA, #BronzeOA, and non-OA or #paywalled), it found that "easily accessible article content is most often cited by readers, but that the higher #APCs of #Hybrid tier publishing may not guarantee increased scholarly or social impact." https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-024-01796-4
Background: An APC-based OA journal (Ecosphere from #Wiley) refused to publish a rebuttal article unless the rebuttal authors paid an #APC. Kudos to Web Ecology for publishing the rebuttal without an APC. Also see the Web Ecology editorial on this case. https://we.copernicus.org/articles/23/131/2023/
"Diamond Open Access, understood as fee-free publication for both reading and publishing, built and uphold by scholarly and scientific entities, as well as Green Open Access, are noncommercial landmarks compatible with the paradigm of public goods and are inclusive by nature."
"European repositories acquire, preserve & provide open access to tens or possibly hundreds of millions of valuable research outputs & represent critical, not-for-profit infrastructure in the European #OpenScience landscape…They are increasingly recognised as the main mechanism for collecting & providing access to a wide range of…research outputs."
"The Canadian Association of Research Libraries (#CARL), the Ontario Council of University Libraries (#OCUL), and University of Toronto Libraries are pleased to announce their…intent to develop…a robust and scalable multi-institutional national #repository service."
"In November, the US Repository Network (#USRN) will launch a pilot project aimed at improving the #discoverability of articles in #repositories. This pilot project involves the use of services from #CORE, a not-for-profit aggregator based at Open University in the UK."
New study from #DeltaThink: "2022’s #OpenAccess market grew by a little over 24% from 2021. This is around 2/3 of the growth we saw in 2021…Growth in OA remains significantly above…the underlying…journals market. Just over 49% of all scholarly articles were published as paid-for OA in 2022, accounting for just under 20% of the total journal publishing market value." https://deltathink.com/news-views-market-sizing-update-2023/
"This year we’re celebrating the 15th anniversary of unanimous votes by faculty in Harvard’s Faculty of Arts & Sciences and the Harvard Law School to adopt [#RightsRetention#OpenAccess policies]…#Repositories are also at the foundation of collaborative non-APC scholarly journal publishing models, as core infrastructure."
1/ I'm seeing a definite shift from protesting high subscription prices at non-OA journals to protesting high #APCs, and APCs as such, at APC-based #OA journals.
On the one hand, this is a sign of progress. There's rising acceptance that #OpenAccess is the future and #subscriptions are the past. We're fine-tuning how to do the future and debating different forks in the road.
2/ On the other hand, too many people protesting #APCs are unaware of #NoAPC methods for delivering #OpenAccess, such as #GreenOA and #DiamondOA. They don't see the forks in the road (except different ways to charge APCs) and end up protesting OA as such, not just APC-based OA. Please help correct these misunderstandings whenever they arise. Aversion to APCs is justified but should be surgical.
"There are also unexpected synergies that emerge from this combination functions in a single repository. Members’ comments about various works will eventually (some time after launch) be publishable via #ActivityPub streams."
At p. 5: "Concordia should…further the development of copyright support through an institutionally supported rights retention strategy, which can support green open access and diversify how research can be made openly accessible."
Update. Another piece made it through peer review w the false claims that most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs & that #GreenOA must be embargoed. Also makes a new false claim I've never seen before, that journals always hold the #copyright to green OA articles. Tho trying to cover all the major options, it doesn't acknowledge the existence of no-APC or #DiamondOA journals. Same with #preprints. Please don't give this to "novice researchers" as an intro to publishing. https://journals.ku.edu/kjm/article/view/21169/19219
It mentions APC discounts and read-and-publish agreements. But it doesn't mention no-APC (#DiamondOA) journals or the fact that most peer-reviewed OA journals (≈ 70%) are no-APC. Nor does it mention #GreenOA.
It's wrong that all OA journals charge APCs, wrong that all paid APCs are paid by authors, and wrong that the #NelsonMemo requires journal-based or #GoldOA. It requires repository-based or #GreenOA.
Update. This new study concludes (in effect) that authors with less funding to pay #APCs are less likely to publish in APC-based #OpenAccess journals. But it words the conclusion this way: "Open access [without qualification] may become a barrier to the dissemination of work for researchers who have financial difficulty choosing open access."
"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12109-024-09978-0
PS: This is careless and misleading. APCs are the barrier, not OA. The article doesn't mention no-fee #GreenOA or #DiamondOA.