Publishing habits and perceptions of open access publishing and public access amongst clinical and research fellows.

Robin O’Hanlon,Samuel Stabler,Jeanine Mcsweeney

doi:10.5195/jmla.2020.751

Abstract

IntroductionOpen access (OA) publishing rates have risen dramatically in the biomedical sciences in the past decade. However, few studies have focused on the publishing activities and attitudes of early career researchers. The aim of this study was to examine current publishing activities of clinical and research fellows and their perceptions of OA publishing and public access.MethodsThis study employed a mixed methods approach. Data on publications authored by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center fellows between 2013 and 2018 were collected via an in-house author profile system and citation indexes. Journals were categorized according to SHERPA/RoMEO classifications. In-person and telephone interviews were conducted with fifteen fellows to discern their perceptions of OA publishing.ResultsThe total percentage of fellows’ publications that were freely available OA was 28.6%, with a relatively flat rate between 2013 and 2018. Publications with fellows as first authors were significantly more likely to be OA. Fellows cited high article processing charges (APCs) and perceived lack of journal quality or prestige as barriers to OA publishing. Fellows generally expressed support for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) public access policy.ConclusionsWhile the fellows in this study acknowledged the potential of OA to aid in research dissemination, they also expressed hesitation to publish OA related to confusion surrounding legitimate OA and predatory publications and frustration with APCs. Fellows supported the NIH public access policy and accepted it as part of their research process. Health sciences information professionals could potentially leverage this acceptance of public access to advocate for OA publishing.

Highlights

Open access (OA) publishing rates have risen dramatically in the biomedical sciences in the past decade
The recent ten-year anniversary of the National Institute of Health’s public access policy and the approaching ten-year anniversary of the launch of the National Library of Medicine’s full-text archive PubMed Central (PMC) provide an opportunity to reflect on the growth of public access over the past decade
While many health sciences information professionals have been at the forefront of open publishing initiatives, the vitality of the OA movement hinges on the decisions made jmla.mlanet.org

Summary

Introduction

Open access (OA) publishing rates have risen dramatically in the biomedical sciences in the past decade. Open access (OA) and public access publishing represent growing and ever-changing areas of interest to health sciences information professionals. By authors about where they publish their work This is applicable in regard to the research and publishing activities of early career professionals (e.g., medical fellows and residents), many of whom are still in the nascent stage of their publishing careers. As early career professionals in the health sciences establish their research careers, it is essential to develop a baseline understanding of how this group perceives the challenges and benefits of various publishing models, to understand how these attitudes may shift over time, and to understand how we as health information professionals can support this group in the immediate future

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion