Editorial for the Fourth Issue

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report results of a study which investigated the growth of open access (OA) journals across the world with reference to the Asian region. Details of 117 OA journals were collected from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) to determine the geographic distribution, language of publication and growth of periodical year-wise. The study makes detail analysis of four OA periodical published from India, Iran, Pakistan and Taiwan. Pattern of authorship and contribution according to nature of professional work were analyzed. The study reveals that most contributions were made by teaching professionals in comparison to working library and information officers. Single-authored contributions dominated (44 per cent) in all periodicals of the Asian region, indicating low amount of teamwork/collaborative contributions to library and information science (LIS) research by the authors of this region. To know the subject distribution of articles, the study was limited to 27 ...

Background. Open access (OA) journals allows access to research papers free of charge to the reader. Traditionally, biomedical researchers use databases like MEDLINE and EMBASE to discover new advances. However, biomedical OA journals might not fulfill such databases’ criteria, hindering dissemination. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a database exclusively listing OA journals. The aim of this study was to investigate DOAJ’s coverage of biomedical OA journals compared with the conventional biomedical databases.Methods. Information on all journals listed in four conventional biomedical databases (MEDLINE, PubMed Central, EMBASE and SCOPUS) and DOAJ were gathered. Journals were included if they were (1) actively publishing, (2) full OA, (3) prospectively indexed in one or more database, and (4) of biomedical subject. Impact factor and journal language were also collected. DOAJ was compared with conventional databases regarding the proportion of journals covered, along with their impact factor and publishing language. The proportion of journals with articles indexed by DOAJ was determined.Results. In total, 3,236 biomedical OA journals were included in the study. Of the included journals, 86.7% were listed in DOAJ. Combined, the conventional biomedical databases listed 75.0% of the journals; 18.7% in MEDLINE; 36.5% in PubMed Central; 51.5% in SCOPUS and 50.6% in EMBASE. Of the journals in DOAJ, 88.7% published in English and 20.6% had received impact factor for 2012 compared with 93.5% and 26.0%, respectively, for journals in the conventional biomedical databases. A subset of 51.1% and 48.5% of the journals in DOAJ had articles indexed from 2012 and 2013, respectively. Of journals exclusively listed in DOAJ, one journal had received an impact factor for 2012, and 59.6% of the journals had no content from 2013 indexed in DOAJ.Conclusions. DOAJ is the most complete registry of biomedical OA journals compared with five conventional biomedical databases. However, DOAJ only indexes articles for half of the biomedical journals listed, making it an incomplete source for biomedical research papers in general.

Background: Open access (OA) journals disseminate research papers free of charge to the reader. Traditionally, biomedical researchers use databases like MEDLINE and EMBASE to discover new advances. However, biomedical OA journals might not fulfil such databases’ criteria, hindering dissemination. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a database searchable at article level, focusing exclusively on OA journals. The aim of this study was to investigate DOAJ’s coverage of biomedical OA journals compared with the conventional biomedical databases. Methods: Information on all journals listed in five conventional biomedical databases (MEDLINE, National Library of Medicine, PubMed Central, EMBASE and SCOPUS) and DOAJ were gathered. Journals were included if they were 1) actively publishing, 2) full OA, 3) prospectively indexed in one or more database, and 4) of biomedical subject. Impact factor and journal language were also collected. DOAJ was compared with conventional databases regarding the proportion of journals covered, along with their impact factor and publishing language. The proportion of journals with articles indexed by DOAJ was determined. Results: In total, 3,236 biomedical OA journals were included in the study. Of the included journals, 86.7% were listed in DOAJ. Combined, the conventional biomedical databases listed 75.0% of the journals; 18.7 % in MEDLINE; 36.5% in PubMed Central; 51.5% in SCOPUS and 50.6% in EMBASE. Of the journals in DOAJ, 88.7% published in English and 20.6% had received impact factor for 2012 compared with 93.5% and 26.0%, respectively, for journals in the conventional biomedical databases. Of journals exclusively listed in DOAJ, only one had received an impact factor. A subset of 51.1% and 48.5% of the journals in DOAJ had articles indexed from 2012 and 2013, respectively. Conclusions: DOAJ is the most complete registry of biomedical OA journals compared with five conventional biomedical databases. However, DOAJ only indexes articles for half of the biomedical journals listed, making it an incomplete source for biomedical research papers in general.

The paper gives an account of the origin and development of the Open Access Initiative and explains the concept of open access publishing. It also highlight various facets related to the open access scholarly publishing in the field of Media & Communication on the basis of data collected from the most authoritative online directory of open access journals, i.e., Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The DOAJ covers 8492 open access journals of which 106 journals are listed under the subject heading ‘Media & Communication’. Most of the open access journals in Media & Communication were started during late 1990s and are being published from 34 different countries on 6 continents in 13 different languages. More than 80 % open access journals are being published by the not-for-profit sector such as academic institutions and universities. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology , 2014, 33(5), pp. 405-411. http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.33.5106

This research has been done to examine the extent of citations of the ISI Web of Science’s journal articles to DOAJ’s journals during 2003-2008. The research method is bibliometrics and citation analysis.The research data have been collected by means of Cited Reference Search in ISI Web of Science. The research data have been analyzed by SPSS 16, finally, after studying 2953 journals from DOAJ, it was clarified that 321 journals (10.87%) had been received citations, and the total citations which allocated to these journals were 19050. Pure sciences had 10116 citations (53.1%), health and medical sciences had 5965 citations (31.31%), technology and engineering had 1436 citations (7.54%), social sciences had 832 citations (4.37%), arts and humanities had 701 citations (3.68%). According to these findings, trend to open access journals in pure sciences is more than the other four fields, as well as, the trend to these journals in pure sciences and health and medical sciences generally is more remarkable than arts and humanities and social sciences. On the other hand, the findings of Chi-square test is also indicative that there is a meaningful difference among the citations in terms of the mentioned-above five fields. Keywords: Open access journals, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), ISI Web of Science, Citation analysis.

Despite its prominent position as one of the leading for-profit scholarly publishers of subscription and open access (OA) journals, and its membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), Springer Nature can be criticized for taking a vague approach in its editorial policies pertaining to “predatory” publishing. While cautioning authors and/or editors about the citation of papers that are published in “predatory” journals, the advice presented in the policies itself is flawed due its limitation to OA journals – thus apparently excluding the possibility that subscription journals might also be “predatory” and failing to specify precisely which journals authors and editors should be careful of, i.e., no source for the “predatory” definition of OA journals is indicated. Moreover, this vague set of policies does not have a publication date, nor is any authorship specified. The opacity of these aspects of these editorial policies limits their usefulness and weakens their objectives, namely in ostensibly offering scholarly advice to protect editors and authors. I argue that the Springer Nature policies pertaining to “predatory” publishing as they currently stand are not useful, and if left unchanged, can be a source of confusion or error for authors and editors of Springer Nature journals. In this connection, the identified risk is that if the poor advice indicated in those policies is heeded, it may encourage abuse, insults and/or indiscriminate profiling of academics, including those associated with Springer Nature journals. While assuming Springer Nature’s genuine intention to alert editors and authors against citing papers published in suspect scholarly venues, I argue that this editorial set of policies should either be rewritten to rely on clearer parameters, including a definitive list of journals for which “predatory” criteria have been defined, or abandoned as they are overly broad. The criticism is aimed at stimulating a discussion among other editors and publishers, especially COPE members.

See video of the presentation.The presentation will highlight the important distinction between prestige and quality of (open access) journals and provide insight in the process and challenges of agreeing on and implementing new inclusion criteria for journals to be listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals as a service covering open access journals from all continents. The questions related to global acceptance of concepts of licenses, author deposit policies, persistent identifiers and long term preservation will be addressed as well.

My dear members of NSSA, with immense pleasure, I would like to inform you all that the inclusion of our journal Journal of Spinal Surgery (JOSS) (0975-2625, 2348-6031) in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) from now onwards. This milestone is achieved with continuous support from all members, scientific contributors, ever encouraging executive committee of NSSA and a hard working Editorial Board Members, following a consistent publication of high-quality articles in perfect time every quarter in the past few years. JOSS started its publications in the year 2014 as an open-access journal and has been indexed in various databases. Currently, the journal is registered with the following abstracting partners: Google Scholar, ProQuest, Baidu Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, EBSCO Publishing’s Electronic Databases, Ex Libris-Primo Central, Hinari, Infotrieve, Netherlands ISSN Centre, TDNet, and Wangfang Data. Inclusion of JOSS in DOAJ is special for us since DOAJ is one of the Indexing Databases approved by the National Medical Commission (NMC) of India. As per the new regulations (June 30, 2025) of the NMC, India, only original papers, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and case series that are published in journals included in DOAJ will be considered for promotion of medical faculty. The first three authors of an article will be considered for promotion from July 1, 2025, onwards in all medical colleges of India. I wish and foresee the journal to the next level of development and become a leading Neuro Spinal journal globally with all your contributions. I also invite high-end, valuable research articles, original articles, case series, innovations, and reflections from all Indian neurosurgeons. When JOSS becomes the face of Neurospinal surgery in India and abroad, NSSA will stand tall with all proud members. Every achievement is not final but a stepping stone for the next. There is no Zenith. My special thanks to my EB members and especially to the editors Dr. Jayesh Shardara, Dr Sachin Borker, Dr. Vinu Gopal, and Dr. Praveen Salunke for their tireless support. JOSS is the official journal of NSSA Thank you

The Philippine Journal of Pathology (PJP) has recently been accepted for inclusion in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). It is a quiet but meaningful milestone—like the ripple that follows a small stone dropped into still water, widening slowly and quietly, yet certain in its direction. The DOAJ is an international index of peer-reviewed, open-access journals that meet recognized standards of editorial quality and ethical publishing. Managed by the Infrastructure Services for Open Access (IS4OA) in the United Kingdom, it lists over 20,000 journals worldwide that are committed to transparency, peer review integrity, and the free availability of research. Acceptance into DOAJ follows a detailed evaluation of a journal’s policies, editorial processes and openness, ensuring that the journals it lists uphold the principles of open science. For PJP, being part of DOAJ affirms that we are on the right path. It validates the systems we have built over the years: clear editorial policies, a rigorous peer review process, and the quiet discipline of upholding ethical standards in publishing. More importantly, it allows the work of Filipino pathologists and laboratory scientists to reach a wider audience through greater visibility in search engines, institutional repositories, and other The practical benefits are welcome, but the recognition is most meaningful as a reminder of what has sustained us. PJP has always been an endeavor that thrives on its contributors’ active participation. Maintained by members, supported by the Philippine Society of Pathologists, and built upon the trust of its contributors and readers. The journal’s progress rests on the generosity of those who give their time and expertise for the advancement of the discipline. We mark this milestone quietly, as one might watch a ripple extend across calm water — without fanfare, but with a sense of continuity. The inclusion in DOAJ is not an endpoint, but a signpost — encouraging us to keep improving, to maintain transparency, and to hold fast to the values that have guided us from the beginning. To our authors, reviewers, readers, and the PSP community: thank you for your continued support. May this small achievement remind us that even the gentlest motion, made in the spirit of service, can carry far.

This paper examines the open access journals which are listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals. The objectives of this study are to analyse the open access journals on Fisheries and Aquaculture published in various years, disciplines, languages, countries and licence wise. The majority of journals are published by with United States, English being the most common communication language; the large number of journals are published in Aquaculture and fisheries disciplines, while very few journals are published in zoology, biology, ecology and environmental science disciplines respectively. It is found that the majority of journals were published during the year 2002–2011.

<h3>Objective</h3> Open access (OA) publishing allows research to be freely available to readers, whilst costs are usually transferred to authors, funders, or institutions. This study explores OA indexing and publication costs among occupational health journals. <h3>Material and Methods</h3> We queried the Ulrichsweb database (a comprehensive catalog for academic and non-academic publications) for publications under the subject ‘occupational health and safety’. Filters were applied to restrict the search to active peer-reviewed journals with either print or online formats. After deduplication, journals were searched for indexing in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). Data on OA status, article processing charges (APC), and author copyright retention were retrieved from DOAJ. The DIAMAS criteria (persistent identification, scholarly journal, OA with licenses, no fees, open to all authors, and community-owned) were used to define diamond OA journals when all criteria were met. Publishers were labelled as commercial or non-commercial by reviewing publishers’ websites and stock exchange listings. APC were compared by type of publisher (commercial/non-commercial) with the Mann-Whitney U-test. A p &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. <h3>Results</h3> Out of the 107 journals analyzed, 33 (30.8%) were fully OA and 15 (14%) were diamond OA journals. In the subset of fully OA journals, 6 (18.2%) were owned by commercial publishers and 27 (81.8%), non-commercial. Journals owned by commercial publishers charged higher APC (median: 1532.5 EUR, IQR: 671.25 – 1745) than non-commercial (median: 0 EUR, IQR: 0 – 421, p = 0.02). Fifteen (14%) OA journals allowed authors to retain copyright of their works. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Nearly one third of occupational health journals in Ulrichsweb are fully OA and less than 2 in 10, diamond OA. Those owned by commercial publishers charge higher APC. Existing occupational health journals could evaluate transitioning to non-commercial or diamond OA models, while new diamond OA journal initiatives could be encouraged.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to consider the economic perspective in open access publishing. The status of the article processing charges in open access journals is explored and highlighted.Design/methodology/approachThe study is based on the analysis of journals indexed by Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the fee structure levied by them as article processing charges (APCs).FindingsOpen access journal publishers have to evolve a mechanism that will share the burden of the authors interested in publishing in OA journals that levy article processing charges.Research limitations/implicationsThe study can act as an eye‐opener for the publishers and associations affiliated with authors to support them and their works in making them publishable in open access journals which charge fees for article publishing. Also, the study can be extended on the basis of economic models that open access journals share in different disciplines and additional work can be carried out to highlight the perception of the authors who are benefitted from article processing charges.Social implicationsAn economic divide between the authors who belong to the developed nations and the authors who reside from third world nations can be bridged.Originality/valueThe study is first of its kind, as it highlights the economic burden that the authors share in a fee‐based open access publishing world.

Predatory publishing: what authors need to know.

The SOAP (Study of Open Access Publishing) project has analyzed the current supply and demand situation in the open access journal landscape. Starting from the Directory of Open Access Journals, several sources of data were considered, including journal websites and direct inquiries within the publishing industry to comprehensively map the present supply of online peer-reviewed OA journals. The demand for open access publishing is summarised, as assessed through a large-scale survey of researchers' opinions and attitudes. Some forty thousand answers were collected across disciplines and around the world, reflecting major support for the idea of open access, while highlighting drivers of and barriers to open access publishing.

Correlation Between Cost of Publication and Journal Impact. Comprehensive Cross-sectional Study of Exclusively Open-Access Surgical Journals