Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals

[CSP in 40 years of scientific publications]

In 2024, Cadernos de Saúde Pública (CSP) celebrates 40 years of uninterrupted publications. This article analyzes the trajectory of the journal and projects its future considering contemporary challenges in scientific publishing in the field of Public Health. This study was based on the analysis of main editorial policy milestones and the identification of the most popular topics. Three periods were recognized. In the "beginning" (1985 to 1990), the journal had restricted circulation, with a quarterly frequency. The word "epidemiology", used in a descriptive context, is highlighted. Then, in the period of "consolidation" (1991 to October 2012), CSP was indexed in the Index Medicus-MEDLINE database and had its online collection published by the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), expanding the reach of articles. In this period, the words that characterize the field of policy, planning, and management were clearly seen, and terms related to the epidemiological method emerged. The period of "diversity" (November 2012 to November 2023) introduced the requirement of an external editor to the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation's staff among the three co-editors-in-chief, aiming to ensure editorial independence. New activities and a similar frequency among the five most common terms highlight such "diversity". Several issues are observed in scientific publishing in 2024: non-commercial Open Science, artificial intelligence, appreciation of science, scientific dissemination, among others. Addressing new challenges in an ethical and transparent manner will allow future advances, maintaining CSP's credibility among authors and readers and its commitment to improvements in the living and health conditions of populations.

Identifying Core Journals in Otolaryngology: A Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVES

As research in otolaryngology continues to expand rapidly, it is important to identify core journals to keep clinicians updated with the latest advances. This study is the first to characterize core journals in otolaryngology.

METHODS

Using h-index and impact factor (IF), the top 15 NLM-indexed otolaryngology journals were selected for analysis. The references from all articles published in these journals in one randomized quarter were compiled into a citation rank list, with the most cited journal ranked the highest. Citation zonal distribution analysis was conducted to identify the zonal distribution of otolaryngology journals.

RESULTS

A total of 3150 journals containing 26876 articles were cited in otolaryngology literature in April-June 2019. Laryngoscope was the most cited journal containing 1762 citations. IF is significantly associated with the h-index for the top 10 otolaryngology journals (p = 0.032). Three core journal zones were identified, with Zone 1 containing 8 journals, Zone 2 containing 36 journals, and Zone 3 containing 189 journals. A linear relationship between the log journal rank for Zones 1-3 and a cumulative number of citations was found (R2  = 0.9948).

CONCLUSION

Eight core journals for otolaryngology were identified: Laryngoscope, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Otology & Neurotology, JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Head & Neck, European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. In the face of rapidly evolving research and a multitude of journals, the high citation density within these core journals highlights their utility in updating busy clinicians.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 133:3346-3352, 2023.

Fostering openness in open science: An ethical discussion of risks and benefits

Transformation of science by embracing the concepts of open science presents a very attractive strategy to enhance the reliability of science. Open science policies embody the concepts of open data and open access that encompass sharing of resources, dissemination of ideas, and synergizing the collaborative forums of research. Despite the opportunities in openness, however, there are grave ethical concerns too, and they present a dual-use dilemma. Access to sensitive information is seen as a security risk, and it also possesses other concerns such as confidentiality, privacy, and affordability. There are arguments that open science can be harmful to marginalized groups. Through this study, we aim to discuss the opportunities of open science, as well as the ethical and security aspects, which require further deliberation before full-fledged acceptance in the science community.

Overlay journals: A study of the current landscape

Overlay journals are characterised by their articles being published on open access repositories, often already starting in their initial preprint form as a prerequisite for submission to the journal prior to initiating the peer-review process. In this study we aimed to identify currently active overlay journals and examine their characteristics. We utilised an explorative web search and contacted key service providers for additional information. The final sample consisted of 34 overlay journals. While the results show that new overlay journals have been actively established within recent years, the current presence of overlay journals remains diminutive compared to the overall number of open access journals. Most overlay journals publish articles in natural sciences, mathematics or computer sciences, and are commonly published by groups of academics rather than formal organisations. They may also rank highly within the traditional journal citation metrics. None of the investigated journals required fees from authors, which is likely related to the cost-effective aspects of the overlay publishing model. Both the growth in adoption of open access preprint repositories and researchers’ willingness to publish in overlay journals will determine the model’s wider impact on scholarly publishing.

National differences in dissemination and use of open access literature

Open Access (OA) dissemination has been gaining a lot of momentum over the last decade, thanks to the implementation of several OA policies by funders and institutions, as well as the development of several new platforms that facilitate the publication of OA content at low or no cost. Studies have shown that nearly half of the contemporary scientific literature could be available online for free. However, few studies have compared the use of OA literature across countries. This study aims to provide a global picture of OA adoption by countries, using two indicators: publications in OA and references made to articles in OA. We find that, on average, low-income countries are publishing and citing OA at the highest rate, while upper middle-income countries and higher-income countries publish and cite OA articles at below world-average rates. These results highlight national differences in OA uptake and suggest that more OA initiatives at the institutional, national, and international levels are needed to support wider adoption of open scholarship.