의학 분야 오픈 액세스 현황 분석을 통한 국내 의학 정보 활성화 방안

Some Research Wants to Be Free, Some Follows the Money: Bogus Journals Complicate the Open Access Movement

Obama Signs Act to Make More Federally Funded Research Open Access: NIH Requirement Extended to Other Agencies

According to Robin P. Peek, co-founder of the Open Access Directory and associate professor at the Simmons Graduate School of Library and Information Science, scholarly communication through the dissemination of journals was first reported in 1665 (Peek & Newby, 1996, p. 5). However, it took 337 years for the scholarly community to formalize a global initiative declaring research a public good, with unrestricted, free access for everyone. The 2002 Budapest Open Access Initiative ushered in a paradigm shift in the way scholars create and share knowledge. The launch of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) in 2003 formalized an alternative venue for scholars to publish their work. From 2004 to 2010, the number of titles listed in the DOAJ rose from 1,250 to more than 5,200(Walters & Linvill, 2010, p. 372). Today, the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) continues to work as a catalyst for new models of scholarly communication, working in the fields of author rights, digital repositories, and open data.As the model of scholarly communication evolves and shifts, so too has the field of bibliometrics. The Open Citation Project, a joint NSF-JISC International Digital Libraries Research Programme funded initiative, has been analyzing citation counts in open access repositories, impact factors of open access journals, and the role of preprints in the dissemination of knowledge since 1999. The growing field of altmetrics is currently developing alternative models to traditional citation indices, such as the h-index, and beginning to study the role of Zotero and Mendeley within the context of scholarly communication. These new approaches to scholarly metrics are uncovering the broad intellectual networks contributing to a single journal article, well beyond the bibliography. As a corollary, the persistent myth of the lone scholar working in a silent, secluded office surrounded by books and articles is slowly eroding.Academic libraries have been at the center of many of these endeavors, often pushing open access initiatives on their campuses, building digital repositories, hosting Zotero workshops for faculty and students, and assisting scholars in negotiating author rights for their work. Libraries are pivotal nodes in almost every intellectual network. However, even with the development of new metrics in paratextual evaluation, the work of libraries and librarians continues to be obscured. This is because the libraries lurk in the most overlooked paratextual element: the acknowledgement.What this paper argues is that the acknowledgments are a crucial but overlooked aspect of scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Not only would a comprehensive analysis of acknowledgements provide a more accurate description of intellectual networks, further eroding the myth of the lone scholar, but it would also quantify and illuminate the importance of libraries and librarians in the scholarly communication process. As a corollary, tenure-track librarians should include research acknowledgments in tenure and promotion reports in order to demonstrate their contributions to scholarship.History of Paratextual ScholarshipThere has been a growing interest in the paratextual elements of scholarly communication in the last decade. Formal elements of documentation, footnotes and citations in particular, have become the subject of entire treatises on expressions of intellectual debt.(Grafton, 1997; Hauptman, 2008; Zerby, 2002). Marginalia, written comments or annotations in the margins of manuscripts, in addition, have been examined quite thoroughly by H.J. Jackson's Marginalia: Readers Writing in Books (Jackson, 2001). Scholars in this field have largely focused on the functional attributes of paratextual elements as expressions of intellectual debt. As Sir Anthony Grafton writes about the use of footnotes in historical scholarship, First, they persuade: they convince the reader that the historian has done an acceptable amount of work, enough to lie within the tolerance of the field. …

A Review of: Hadad, S., & Aharony, N. (2024). Librarians and academic libraries’ role in promoting open access: What needs to change? College & Research Libraries, 85(4), 464–478. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.4.464 Objective – The study aims to explore and examine how Israeli librarians perceive their role and the academic library's role in promoting open access (OA) publishing; identify the barriers, challenges, and difficulties in implementing OA; and determine the factors and needs that are required to promote OA. By examining these aspects, the research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of OA promotion in Israeli academic libraries, the challenges faced by librarians, and the necessary changes and support required to enhance OA adoption in the country's academic institutions. Design – Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews. Setting – University libraries in Israel. Subjects – One representative from each of the ten existing universities in Israel. The ten participants held positions as administrators of the library system at their institution (50%), directors of disciplinary libraries (30%), or directors of information systems in academic libraries of Israeli universities. Among the subjects, 90% were female. In terms of seniority, 60% of respondents had been employed by their institution for over 10 years, while 40% had been less than 10 years in their current positions. Methods – Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom between April and June of 2020. The interviews were based on items from existing surveys on librarians' attitudes towards open access and changes in academic library practices. The authors used thematic analysis to categorize and code the interview responses. This "bottom-up" approach allowed researchers to identify common expressions and recurring themes. The analysis yielded 1,264 statements classified into three main categories with several sub-categories. To ensure reliability, 25% of the statements were analyzed by a second coder, resulting in a Cohen's Kappa of .86 (.8 and above is rated as “almost perfect”). The researchers ensured trustworthiness of data by adhering to four principles: truth-value, applicability, consistency, and neutrality of data. Main Results – The interview data revealed that, in general, librarians see their role as crucial in advising researchers about OA publishing. They view themselves as responsible for implementing changes related to OA after institutional policies are set. The authors identify a myriad of barriers to overcome if OA is going to grow and become a more accepted practice of publishing for Israeli researchers. These barriers include, but are not limited to, lack of budget for OA agreements, lack of cooperation from university management, researchers' unfamiliarity with OA and fears about predatory journals, the influence of journal impact factors, and lack of personnel and training for librarians. In order to overcome these barriers, librarians believe they need clear national and institutional OA policies, as well as cooperation and collaboration between academic institutions on OA initiatives. Librarians also believe that systematic training for library staff in OA publishing is imperative, along with guidance and incentives for researchers to publish in OA journals. The results also yielded qualitative data about librarians’ current involvement in OA, which include participating in OA agreements through library consortia, operating current research information systems (CRIS), promoting institutional policies, and interfacing with university administration on OA issues. The study also revealed that there is a desire among librarians to establish the library as the central body for OA matters within their institutions. Conclusion – Librarians see their role as crucial in promoting open access (OA) publishing, particularly in advising researchers and implementing changes after institutional policies are set. Overall, the study concludes that while librarians see themselves as playing important roles in promoting OA, they face numerous challenges and require additional support and resources to fulfill this role effectively. The research highlights the need for systemic changes at both institutional and national levels to advance OA adoption in Israeli academic institutions.

See video of the presentation.In 2013 The University of Bergen established a publication fund to cover the costs for publishing Open Access. The fund covers Article Processing Charges (APC) in both Open Access journals and hybrid Open Access in subscription journals. The publication fund at The University of Bergen is one of few in Norway that includes support for hybrid Open Access. The hybrid model is controversial because the publisher receives income twice for the same article, first through APC and then through subscriptions.The arguments for including hybrid were: (1) there are more journals to choose from, hence giving more researchers the opportunity and initiative to publish Open Access. (2) the quality issue of Open Access journals. The University believed that by including hybrid more articles would be published Open Access in renowned journals. This because a larger percentage of hybrid journals are registered on level 2 in the Norwegian System for defining quality of publication channels.The fund has been a success in so far that it has led to an increase in Open Access articles in high quality journals, also within research fields that traditionally do not publish Open Access. The fund has granted applications for almost 9 million NOK. Of a total of 437 granted applications, 278 (64 %) are articles in hybrid journals. 103 articles (24 %) have been published on level 2; 11 in Open Access-journals and 92 hybrid.When it comes to research field, the results show that about 90 % of granted applications come from researchers within medicine, psychology and the natural sciences, including many fields that already have a tradition for publishing their research Open Access. The fund has only led to a slight increase in Open Access publishing with APC within the humanities, social sciences and law.Researchers are happy with hybrid publishing because they are able to continue publishing in the same journals as before. It is also the case that support of hybrid publishing results in more Open Access articles in high quality journals according to the Norwegian system. Yet, support for hybrid publishing has so far not altered which research fields that publish Open Access, although there has been an increase of Open Access publications within all faculties.Our presentation will form a basis for discussing a number of questions pertaining to the hybrid model: What have the academic and economic consequences of the hybrid model been? Do all researchers at the University have the same opportunity to publish their research Open Access? Has support of hybrid lead to more Open Access in renowned publication channels?The University has appointed a group to evaluate the publication fund and recommend if and how it shall continue. Will the fund continue to support hybrid after the trial period ends in 2015?

This paper explains that socio-cultural contexts affect the transition in scholarly communication. Observing the process of introducing the open access model to the field of medicine in Korea, this paper found that the first, associations of medical societies considered a quality control system very important in the construction of an open access based fulltext DB, the second, there was an medical journal DB with a quality control procedure, and the third, many medical societies provided their journals fulltext to the public on their homepages. Consequently, this paper found that these factors had an effect on the process of transition in scholarly communication in the field of medicine in Korea.

Open data is becoming more and more a recognised research output in the research life cycle. Research validation and replication depend on open data which enriches the research output. Open data goes beyond the traditional article and book publishing format. As such open data reinforces Open Access (OA) publishing, and OA publishing reinforces open data. Open data and OA publishing stimulate collaboration and increase both the impact of research findings and the visibility of researchers and research groups. In the past years, funders and institutions developed independently policies that support open data and OA publishing. Researchers are increasingly required to publish OA and make their data open. The question is how we can evaluate the impact of Open data on OA publishing. Subsequently, to what extent does OA publishing influence open data? At the TU Delft, 82% of peer-reviewed articles and 71% of conference papers are published OA in 2021, but how many of those publications refer to open data? We have no records and no traceability processes in place to answer this question. As a consequence, few datastewards took on themselves to count manually the number of OA publications that include open data. It is nevertheless clear some changes need to occur to help open data and OA publishing joining forces. The current challenges and barriers faced could be reduced with an increase in OA research outputs (OA books or educational resources), a change in research culture and a change in reviewers’ practices. Recognising and rewarding data publishing; credit data review activities; developing a different workflow of the review process if including data review and requiring different expertise from the reviewers on the data review (data management and research insights) are realistic options. In parallel, new features of innovation for the publishing platform (open data review workflow, link to datasets for download) and for data repositories (quality badge on reviewed datasets, flexibility of incorporating review changes) are worth exploring. There are few possible solutions or workaround available that could help all. We can make it easy for the researchers by connecting different blocks of open science and optimising the benefits with the Data Access Statement (DAS) as a standard section of the article template and with publishers providing a DAS template with basic requirements. For institutions, having a dashboard connecting all research outputs with DOIs together will be very beneficial. Another option is giving authors control of their publications by publishing their findings in an open peer-reviewed community-driven journal. Our framework for connecting open data to OA publishing includes an OA publishing platform, data and publication repositories, a funding policy for OA publishing, expertise in Open Science and research lifecycle; and collaboration.

Open access publication rates have been steadily increasing over time. In spite of this growth, academics in low income settings struggle to gain access to the full canon of research literature. While the vast majority of open access repositories and funding organizations with open access policies are based in high income countries, the geographic patterns of open access publication itself are not well characterized. In this study, we developed a computational approach to better understand the topical and geographical landscape of open access publications in the biomedical research literature. Surprisingly, we found a strong negative correlation between country per capita income and the percentage of open access publication. Open access publication rates were particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa, but vastly lower in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and East Asia and the Pacific. These effects persisted when considering papers only bearing authors from within each region and income group. However, papers resulting from international collaborations did have a higher percentage of OA than single-country papers, and inter-regional collaboration increased OA publication for all world regions. There was no clear relationship between the number of open access policies in a region and the percentage of open access publications in that region. To understand the distribution of open access across topics of biomedical research, we examined keywords that were most enriched and depleted in open access papers. Keywords related to genomics, computational biology, animal models, and infectious disease were enriched in open access publications, while keywords related to the environment, nursing, and surgery were depleted in open access publications. This work identifies geographic regions and fields of research that could be priority areas for open access advocacy. The finding that open access publication rates are highest in sub-Saharan Africa and low income countries suggests that factors other than open access policy strongly influence authors’ decisions to make their work openly accessible. The high proportion of OA resulting from international collaborations indicates yet another benefit of collaborative research. Certain applied fields of medical research, notably nursing, surgery, and environmental fields, appear to have a greater proportion of fee-for-access publications, which presumably creates barriers that prevent researchers and practitioners in low income settings from accessing the literature in those fields.

Open access, or no fee access, to journal articles has been gaining wider adoption in the scientific and scholarly communities. The medical physics community is no exception, with many of the journals dedicated to medical physics topics now having specific policies enabling open access. The advantages of open access to scholars, researchers, and other “users” of articles are many, but the topic is not without controversy or complexity.As open access becomes more prevalent, it is important for our community to understand the concepts of open access and the context in which it has come about. Changing regulations by funding agencies, shifts in the attitudes of authors, budgetary considerations, and the interests of journals and societies all play important roles.The speakers in this session will provide background information on open access as well their perspectives on how open access fits into the medical physics landscape and the larger world of scholarly publishing.Learning Objectives:1. Understand the basic concepts and definitions in open access publishing.2. Understand the current state of open access in medical physics.3. Understand the perspective of different stakeholders in open access publishing.

FTC Sues OMICS: Claims Open Access Academic Publisher Scams Academics

Since our first issue in 1977, with founding editor Michael Harloe, IJURR has been at the forefront of critical urban debates. The year 2015 marks an important moment for the journal since we stand at a crossroads between an increasingly corporate publishing environment, in which many journals are becoming online only, their academic content trapped behind expensive electronic pay walls, and an alternative pathway towards a defence of the modern journal as a printed publication, affordable and accessible to a wide range of readers. Many libraries, for example, especially from the global South, continue to rely on print-only subscriptions. At our most recent editorial board meeting held in Mexico City we had a wide-ranging discussion about the future of academic publishing and reaffirmed our commitment to IJURR as a high-quality academic journal available in both print and online formats. The cornerstone of our defence of IJURR in an increasingly challenging publishing environment is our comprehensive redesign. This has been developed over the last two years in collaboration with the Austrian designer Paulus M. Dreibholz, who has extensive experience with cutting-edge architectural and cultural publications, across a variety of different formats. As part of the IJURR redesign each article will work effectively either as an individual electronic document or as a printed version contained within a specific journal issue. The dual approach extends to precise details of the font, layout and pagination. Given the intense pressures on space we have had to find a solution that does not significantly affect our annual page range for the journal. A key element of the redesign has involved changing the existing typefaces. We have replaced the Times New Roman typeface, which is amongst the least distinctive available, with the clearer and more contemporary Mercury (1997), developed by the New York based typeface designer Jonathan Hoefler. For the headings, captions and block quotes, which had been set in Interstate (used for American road signage), we have switched to Avenir Next (2007), a typeface developed by Adrian Frutiger and Akira Kobayashi, which adds greater versatility between print and digital formats than Frutiger's original Avenir (1988) but retains key elements of geometric sans-serif typefaces such as Erbar (1922) and Futura (1927). With our new look we are aiming to make IJURR more distinctive, more readable, and also more closely engaged with cutting-edge developments in design and publishing, including the necessity to connect with wider audiences such as practitioners and urbanists outside the academy. Our redesign also marks a more serious engagement with the use of visual materials ranging from architectural sketches, film stills and photographs to various explanatory figures and tables. We are not only interested in the quality and legibility of these materials, both for print and online readers, but also their precise role in the context of key urban debates. Additionally, each issue of the journal will feature three images on the cover, connected to the articles, but also providing an opportunity to reflect on broader themes in urban culture. We also intend to use this ‘gallery space' to signal the distinctiveness of key debates or symposia. In parallel with changes to the journal we have also worked with the German web designer Corinna Reetz to revamp our website: gone is the clutter and garish maroon banner. In its place we hope that readers will find the site clearer and more navigable. We will be making greater use of our website in future to enable complementary commentaries and shorter interventions to accompany themes developed within the journal itself but also to allow faster interaction with contemporary debates of potential interest to our readers. As part of our commitment to improving IJURR we have also upgraded the paper quality for the printed journal––contrary to recent publishing trends––to ensure that the journal is attractive, readable, and earns its place on our bookshelves. We are keen that the journal should be available for sale in individual bookshops, alongside other critical journals, and we have negotiated a special single-issue price to facilitate this way of reaching wider readerships. We are also introducing a choice of referencing systems between the Chicago (footnote) and Harvard (in-text citation) models to reflect our commitment towards widening the range of disciplines we wish to feature in these pages: we hope that scholars from anthropology, history, science and technology studies (STS) and other disciplines will consider IJURR as a suitable outlet for innovative work that has hitherto been largely published elsewhere. This flexibility is important because it enables us to handle a wider range of data sources, methodological approaches and styles of writing: we are interested in countering the creeping uniformity of academic scholarship and the tendency towards highly formulaic modes of exposition. Another important area of change in academic publishing that affects IJURR directly is the introduction of ‘open access publishing'. This change is being driven mainly by demands that publications derived from publicly funded research activity should be freely available in digital format. At present, there are two ‘open access' options available: ‘green' and ‘gold'. Under ‘green open access', authors can make the peer-reviewed version of their article (i.e. the accepted version before copy editing and formatting) openly available in institutional and not-for-profit repositories after a set embargo period. Under ‘gold open access', authors who have institutional funds available to pay the so-called ‘Article Publication Charge' can make the published version of their article openly available immediately upon publication. IJURR fully embraces the move to green open access. However, our editorial board has raised significant concerns that the payment of exorbitant fees for gold open access is an integral part of the neoliberal drift in higher education and academic publishing. It is also discriminatory, since it will disproportionately benefit scholars from wealthier institutions in the global North with access to sources of research funding and institutions that can support (and indeed demand) the payment of gold open access fees. Nevertheless, we had to weigh our deep concern about gold open access against the need to find a solution that will not deter publicly funded research from being published in IJURR. Within this complicated publishing terrain we decided to offer green open access to all our authors, and gold open access to those authors who have to comply with gold open access requirements posed by their institutions or research funding bodies. At the same time, we actively explore ways in which gold open access fees can be redistributed to benefit authors from different institutional and geographical settings, in consultation with the charitable wing of our activities, the Foundation for Urban and Regional Studies. In recognition that academic publishing, along with its wider institutional and public policy context, is in a state of flux at present we shall regularly review these developments to try and mitigate some of the more iniquitous effects. We are conscious that IJURR is embedded in an asymmetrical environment but do not wish to exacerbate these inequalities further. One additional question linked to the open access debate, is the way in which open access content can be handled in the print version of the journal. As noted earlier, we remain committed to retaining a high quality well-designed print journal, in an era in which commercial and technical advances push for the full ‘digitalization' of academic publications. But what does ‘being open access' mean to subscribers of the print only version of the journal, or to readers who do not have access to digital formats? Although it hinges upon addressing complex legal and institutional issues, we are committed to continue exploring ways for offering equal opportunities for open access to authors and readers alike independently of their geographic location or institutional setting. The significant increase in the quantity of submissions, combined with the increase in quality of papers we receive is a welcome development. Although in 2013 and 2014 we published almost twice our normal content in order to accommodate the increasing number of excellent papers we received, we are now also very close to accepting just 10% of articles submitted. This means we publish only articles that are judged to be truly exceptional in terms of empirical, methodological or conceptual originality and critical insight. What is also important to note, however, is that the journal's high quality is the result of the collective effort and labour put into it not only by authors, editors, and the editorial board and office, but also by our referees, who offer critical comments to improve papers. IJURR is one of the few journals that engage referees at every stage of the reviewing process by communicating all comments and editorial decisions to referees as well as authors. This is made possible thanks to the outstanding support offered by Mel Goodsell and Angela Yeap, under the guidance of Terry McBride, our managing editor. By sharing the anonymized version of the decision letter we send to authors with our international body of referees, we hope to foster the growth of an international community of critical scholars who are sometimes trained in different reviewing traditions. As they can see the comments written by their peers, our reviewers can engage in an international dialogue. Problems of urban and regional development are of growing visibility on a world scale, in rich and poor, socialist and capitalist countries alike. Often … they directly derive from processes which operate on an international level. This journal will compare and contrast such problems as they occur in widely differing situations and social systems. International dialogue has been our mission since the very beginning, a dialogue between scholars from various disciplines and origins, and a dialogue between scholars and activists (and they are oftentimes the same people). In 1998, the editors published a statement reflecting on how IJURR developed with regards to its original objectives. They wrote: ‘Despite the recurrent taste for simple universal models (which can be seen as an indirect form of intellectual domination), we have respected the diversity of urban experience and the usefulness of comparative analysis to enable understanding of the more familiar by contrast to the less familiar'. In 2009, the editors highlighted that international dialogue was more and more reflected in the composition of the editorial board, as well as in the range of articles published in the journal. Moreover, they note that technological changes now allow the journal to be accessible around the world. But, as they note, ‘internationalization is surely above all about acknowledging that theories derived from the experiences of North-West Europe and North America may not be universally applicable, and that those regions may be exceptional from a global perspective. Internationalization is thus a process of reconsidering and challenging theory on a range of levels'. Over the years, the very meaning of IJURR's international mission has changed because the world has profoundly changed. If the language we use to speak of the world has evolved, we remain stuck in dichotomies, despite many calls to break them down. Our efforts in the last decade have been placed on fostering scholarship that attempts to do away with these capitalist/socialist, first world/third world, developed/under-developed, core/periphery, north/south dichotomies in innovative ways. This has meant opening our pages to new epistemological traditions produced outside Europe and North America and in the new transdisciplinary frontiers of social knowledge production. The challenges are great because of language barriers and the continued dominance of English-speaking ways of writing papers and conducting research, which transpires in the reviews we receive. But the journal pursues its work towards internationalization by, for instance, relying on more and more reviewers from outside of Europe and North America. We have recently begun to organize IJURR lectures in other languages than English. The first of such, held in Mexico City in October 2014, will be available online shortly.

Let's Make Those Book Chapters Open Too!

This bibliometric study investigates Open Access (OA) publication and citation trends in Austria, Israel, and Mexico from 2010 to 2020—three countries with comparable research output but differing OA infrastructures. (1) Background: The study examines how national OA policies, funding mechanisms, and transformative agreements (TAs) shape publication and citation patterns across disciplines. (2) Methods: Using Scopus data, the analysis focuses on four broad subject areas (health, physical, life, and social sciences), applying both three-way ANOVA and a Weighted OA Citation Impact index that adjusts citation shares based on the proportional representation of each subject area in national research output. An OA Engagement Score was also developed to assess each country’s policy and infrastructure support. (3) Results: OA publications consistently receive more citations than closed-access ones, confirming a robust OA citation advantage. Austria leads in both OA publication volume and weighted impact, reflecting its strong policy frameworks and TA coverage. Israel, while publishing fewer OA articles, achieves high citation visibility in specific disciplines. Mexico demonstrates strengths in repositories and Diamond OA journals but lags in transformative agreements. (4) Conclusions: National differences in OA policy maturity, infrastructure, and publishing models shape both visibility and citation impact. Structural limitations and indexing disparities may further affect how research from different regions and disciplines is represented globally, emphasizing the need for inclusive and context-sensitive frameworks for evaluating OA engagement.

Towards Scholarly Communication 2.0: Peer-to-Peer Review & Ranking in Open Access Preprint Repositories

Open Access and Legal Publishing: An Annotated Bibliography