Division of Paediatric Urology, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada.
Division of Paediatric Urology, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada.
J Pediatr Urol. 2019 Apr;15(2):159.e1-159.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.08.019. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
The advent of open access publishing has allowed for unrestricted and rapid knowledge dissemination and can generate higher citation levels. However, the establishment of predatory journals exploits this model and may lead to publication of non-peer reviewed work.
The objective of this study was to compare the characteristics and trends of indexed publications in paediatric urology. The primary outcomes were to compare open access vs non-open access publishing. The secondary outcome was to assess whether any open access publications in this cohort could be classified as predatory based on journal data basing and external peer review policies.
PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase reviews were carried out for any publication using the terms 'p(a)ediatric urology' over a 5-year period (October 2012-2017). These publications were individually accessed, assessed for relevance and cross-checked using the ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Report. Bibliometric data, journal type and access model were all individually assessed, ranked and compared using descriptive and non-parametric statistical methods.
From an initial total of 4075 indexed publications, 2244 journal publications across 51 countries were included based on relevance, of which 611 were open access. Open access journals were significantly more likely to publish basic science/laboratory versus clinical publications (10.9% vs 3.3%). They were more likely have higher average citations/publication (17 vs. 8), but there was no difference between open and closed journal impact factors (3.1 vs. 2.7). The overall rate of open access, indexed publications that were not peer reviewed and/or included in open access databases was 6.5% DISCUSSION: The overall numbers of paediatric urological articles appearing on PubMed between 2012 and 2017 have increased by approximately 75%, while the number of open access articles has remained relatively static (25%). Researchers may prefer to publish in specific journals to disseminate results to a particular audience or fear in the current climate that an open access journal may not be considered legitimate, and possibly even predatory, thus having a negative impact on the data and the author's reputation. The impact factor status and route/method of publication may be less important.
Open access, peer reviewed publishing allows rapid international knowledge dissemination. The exact objective definition of what constitutes a predatory journal remains controversial. We have identified a time-stable prevalence of 6.5% open access publications that could meet proposed criteria for a 'borderline/predatory journal'; however, this should not influence the decision to publish in open access journals.
开放获取出版的出现允许不受限制和快速的知识传播，并可以产生更高的引用水平。然而，掠夺性期刊的建立利用了这种模式，可能导致未经同行评审的工作的发表。
本研究的目的是比较小儿泌尿科索引出版物的特征和趋势。主要结果是比较开放获取与非开放获取出版。次要结果是评估本队列中的任何开放获取出版物是否可以根据期刊数据基础和外部同行评审政策被归类为掠夺性期刊。
在 5 年期间（2012 年 10 月至 2017 年），使用术语“小儿泌尿科”在 PubMed、MEDLINE 和 Embase 上进行了任何出版物的综述。这些出版物被单独访问，根据相关性进行评估，并使用 ISI Web of Knowledge 期刊引文报告进行交叉检查。使用描述性和非参数统计方法分别评估、排名和比较生物计量数据、期刊类型和访问模型。
从最初的 4075 篇索引出版物中，根据相关性，有 2244 篇期刊出版物来自 51 个国家，其中 611 篇是开放获取的。与临床出版物相比，开放获取期刊更有可能发表基础科学/实验室研究（10.9% 对 3.3%）。它们更有可能具有较高的平均引用/出版物（17 对 8），但开放和封闭期刊影响因素之间没有差异（3.1 对 2.7）。索引出版物中未经过同行评审和/或包含在开放获取数据库中的非开放获取出版物的总体比例为 6.5%。
2012 年至 2017 年间，在 PubMed 上发表的小儿泌尿科文章数量增加了约 75%，而开放获取文章数量保持相对稳定（25%）。研究人员可能更愿意在特定期刊上发表论文，以便将研究结果传播给特定的受众，或者在当前的环境下担心开放获取期刊可能不被认为是合法的，甚至可能是掠夺性的，从而对数据和作者的声誉产生负面影响。影响因素状态和出版途径/方法可能不太重要。
开放获取、同行评审出版允许快速的国际知识传播。构成掠夺性期刊的确切定义仍然存在争议。我们已经确定了一个稳定的 6.5%的开放获取出版物的存在，这些出版物可能符合“边缘/掠夺性期刊”的标准；然而，这不应影响在开放获取期刊上发表论文的决定。
