scholarly journals The Directory of Open Access Journals covers more biomedical open access journals than other databases

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mads S Liljekvist ◽  
Kristoffer Andresen ◽  
Hans-Christian Pommergaard ◽  
Jacob Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
National Library ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Biomedical Databases

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.

scholarly journals The Directory of Open Access Journals covers more biomedical open access journals than other databases

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mads S Liljekvist ◽  
Kristoffer Andresen ◽  
Hans-Christian Pommergaard ◽  
Jacob Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
National Library ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Biomedical Databases

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.

scholarly journals PubMed Central: An Essential Resource for Information Professionals and Researchers

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 261
Author(s):  
Joanne L. Jordan
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Original Research ◽  
National Library ◽  
Electronic Journals ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
The Future ◽  
Subject Areas ◽  
The Subject

Objective – A review of the journals containing research listed in PubMed Central (PMC), but not selected for inclusion in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) collection. The authors identified reasons why journals had not been included in the collection and if any met the NLM selection criteria and were appropriate for inclusion. Design – Descriptive study. Setting – National Library of Medicine, United States. Subjects – 571 journals that were not included in the NLM collection but had research articles in PMC. Methods – In October 2009, a report was produced from the NLM library system listing journals tagged as having articles in PMC and not being in the NLM collection. Information was gathered on the journals identified and these were checked against the Collection Development Manual of the NLM and the NLM checklist used for selecting electronic journals. The reason for non-selection of the journal was recorded and the subject category, according to the Library of Congress Classification, was noted. Recorded reasons why journals were not selected: • Less than 15% of articles were within scope of NLM collection • Not enough articles published • Coverage (lacking original research or not for a scholarly audience) • Insufficient information to determine reason For journals where the criteria seemed to be met, the decision on selection to the NLM collection was reviewed. Main Results – The authors identified 571 journals that had articles in PMC but did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the NLM journal collection. The majority of these journals (73%) were outside the NLM scope and a further 10% had not published a sufficient number of articles to be considered. A further 3% were assessed as not intended for a scholarly audience or lacked original research and another 3% could not be reviewed due to lack of information available. There were 65 journals (11%) that were referred for further review as the selection criteria seemed to be met and 11 of these journals have subsequently been added to the NLM collection. This is in relation to 482 new print and electronic journals in total that were added to the NLM collection in 2009. However, only 369 of the 571 journals (65%) had one or more articles included in PMC; of these, 238 had one article and 33 had more than four articles in the archive. The reason that some journals had no articles in PMC at the time of this review was due to the time it takes to process new articles and embargos set by the publishers that restrict immediate listing on open access databases such as PMC. A number of these journals may also be new and may not have had a sufficient number of articles or enough information available to be able to include them in the NLM collection. To add context, the authors state that PMC contained over 115,000 NIH-funded articles by the end of November 2010. The subject areas these non-selected journals were classified under included Engineering (15%); Medicine (14%); Mathematics (10%); Chemistry (10%); and Computer Science (9%). Library Science was assigned to 2% of the journals. The Medicine journals were more likely than those in the other subject areas to be new journals without sufficient articles to be included in the NLM collection. Conclusion – When the journal title is out of the scope of the NLM collection, an individual article in that journal can still be included in PMC. This provides a solution to the problem of how to collect biomedical research that is not published in biomedical journals. This may be more important in the future as the field becomes more interdisciplinary. This also provides a useful resource for libraries and researchers searching for full-text biomedical articles. The authors conclude that analyzing the articles from the journals not selected for inclusion in the NLM collection will provide helpful information about the types of biomedical research being published in non-biomedical journals. This will highlight particular areas the NLM should pay attention to in the future.

scholarly journals 2020 - State of our JCMR

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren J. Manning
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Review Process ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Timely Manner ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Access System ◽  
Responsible Manner

AbstractThere were 79 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2019, including 65 original research papers, 2 reviews, 8 technical notes, 1 Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonacne (SCMR) guideline, and 3 corrections. The volume was down slightly from 2018 (n = 89) with a corresponding 5.5% increase in manuscript submissions from 345 to 366. This led to a slight decrease in the acceptance rate from 25 to 22%. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2019 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2020) increased from 5.07 to 5.36. The 2020 impact factor means that on average, each JCMR published in 2017 and 2018 was cited 5.36 times in 2019. Our 5 year impact factor was 5.2. We are now finishing the 13th year of JCMR as an open-access publication with BMC. As outlined in this report, the Open-Access system has dramatically increased the reading and citation of JCMR publications. I hope that our authors will continue to send their very best, high quality manuscripts for JCMR consideration and that our readers will continue to look to JCMR for the very best/state-of-the-art publications in our field. It takes a village to run a journal. JCMR is blessed to have very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and Reviewers. I thank each of them for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner. These efforts have allowed the JCMR to continue as the premier journal of our field. My role, and the entire process would not be possible without the dedication and efforts of our managing editor, Diana Gethers (who will leaving the journal in the coming months) and our assistant managing editor, Jennifer Rodriguez, who has agreed to increase her reponsibilities. Finally, I thank you for entrusting me with the editorship of the JCMR. As I begin my 5th year as your editor-in-chief, please know that I fully recognize we are not perfect in our review process. We try our best to objectively assess every submission in a timely manner, but sometimes don't get it “right.” The editorial process is a tremendously fulfilling experience for me. The opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and a highlight of my week!

scholarly journals “Worth(less) papers” – are journal impact factor and number of citations suitable indicators to evaluate quality of scientists?

2018 ◽  
Vol XVI (2) ◽  
pp. 369-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Racz ◽  
Suzana Marković
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Journal Impact Factor ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Digital Repository ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
On Line ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Journal Impact

Technology driven changings with consecutive increase in the on-line availability and accessibility of journals and papers rapidly changes patterns of academic communication and publishing. The dissemination of important research findings through the academic and scientific community begins with publication in peer-reviewed journals. Aim of this article is to identify, critically evaluate and integrate the findings of relevant, high-quality individual studies addressing the trends of enhancement of visibility and accessibility of academic publishing in digital era. The number of citations a paper receives is often used as a measure of its impact and by extension, of its quality. Many aberrations of the citation practices have been reported in the attempt to increase impact of someone’s paper through manipulation with self-citation, inter-citation and citation cartels. Authors revenues to legally extend visibility, awareness and accessibility of their research outputs with uprising in citation and amplifying measurable personal scientist impact has strongly been enhanced by on line communication tools like networking (LinkedIn, Research Gate, Academia.edu, Google Scholar), sharing (Facebook, Blogs, Twitter, Google Plus) media sharing (Slide Share), data sharing (Dryad Digital Repository, Mendeley database, PubMed, PubChem), code sharing, impact tracking. Publishing in Open Access journals. Many studies and review articles in last decade have examined whether open access articles receive more citations than equivalent subscription toll access) articles and most of them lead to conclusion that there might be high probability that open access articles have the open access citation advantage over generally equivalent payfor-access articles in many, if not most disciplines. But it is still questionable are those never cited papers indeed “Worth(less) papers” and should journal impact factor and number of citations be considered as only suitable indicators to evaluate quality of scientists? “Publish or perish” phrase usually used to describe the pressure in academia to rapidly and continually publish academic work to sustain or further one’s career can now in 21. Century be reformulate into “Publish, be cited and maybe will not Perish”.

scholarly journals Open Access Journals – The way forward for out-of-hospital research publications

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm Boyle
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Healthcare Provider ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
Research Publications ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
General Community ◽  
Hospital Research

The open access journal is becoming a common place to publish compared to the traditional paper based journal as the work is readily available to the research and general community.  The academic community place a lot of emphasis on the quality and impact factor of journals.  There are numerous problems with this stance especially for academic paramedics and the general out-of-hospital healthcare provider.  Some in the academic community look upon open access journals as not being “proper” or “lacking in quality”. In the majority of instances this is not the case as the open access journals have comparable international editorial boards who oversee the manuscript handling processes.

scholarly journals Need to have more Biomedical Journals with Impact Factor and importance of Publication Audit

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaukat Ali Jawaid
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Original Work ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Open Access Article

  doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.35.4.1300 How to cite this:Jawaid SA. Need to have more Biomedical Journals with Impact Factor and importance of Publication Audit. Pak J Med Sci. 2019;35(4):882-886. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.35.4.1300 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

scholarly journals Launching the Journal of International Child Neurology Association (JICNA)

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles R.J.C Newton ◽  
Biju A Hameed
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Child Neurology ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
International Child ◽  
The World ◽  
Knowledge Environment ◽  
Publication Workflow ◽  
The Web

The International Child Neurology Association has started a peer-reviewed child neurology journal, the Journal of International Child Neurology Association (JICNA). The Journal website at http://jicna.org is up and running, and journal has already been receiving submissions. We would like to thank the brave authors who have submitted their initial papers to JICNA. The papers will be deposited on the web, and is currently indexed in CrossRef, Google Scholar and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).All manuscripts submitted to JICNA will undergo full peer review and fast publication. JICNA implements a continuous publication workflow, from 2013 where full citation details are provided for all published articles from the first date of publications whilst maintaining the archives in a number of issues per volume. Under the current licence scholars, scientists, government officials, and the general public can view, download, print and redistribute any article without a subscription. At present JICNA does not charge any article processing and publication fees.In addition the content in JICNA will also be integrated into ICNApedia (http://icnapedia.org) the Child Neurology Knowledge Environment published by the International Child Neurology Association (ICNA).  This would allow readers to access the interesting and useful material on this platform. We aim to get the Journal indexed in Medline within the year and also deposit in other repositories including PubMed Central. In addition there are robust arrangements in place to ensure permanent preservation of, and access to, all content published. But to achieve these goals, the journal needs to be in existence for more than a year and published at least thirty peer-reviewed papers.JICNA will only flourish if it receives papers to publish, and is read and referenced by child neurologists all over the world. We have started and now we look to the ICNA membership to contribute to this journal, and be involved in a new and exciting publication in child neurology helping to disseminate current research as widely as possible. Please start submitting your papers to JICNA via the website: http://jicna.org/index.php/journal/about/submissions#onlineSubmissionsYou will need to register as an author, and follow the author guidelines for submission. If you having any difficulties please contact either of us directly. We look forward to receiving your manuscripts.

scholarly journals Agriculture Journals Covered by Directory of Open Access Journals: An Analytical Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 354
Author(s):  
Muruli Acharya
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Analytical Study ◽  
Plant Science ◽  
Research Information ◽  
Commercial Practice ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Significant Magnitude ◽  
The Status

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>With the advent of open access movement, open access journals (OAJs) being the prodigious source of academic </span><span>and research information have been gaining significant magnitude. The electronic age has made it easier and more </span><span>convenient than ever to break barriers to research information. The present study aims to study and analyse the status </span><span>of 497 OAJs in Agriculture indexed in Directory of Open Access Journals. Specified traits such as Geographic and </span><span>language wise distribution, coverage of Indexing/Abstracting databases, ranking of journals according to Impact Factor (IF), OA licensing model adopted, policy of plagiarism, visibility on social media and related issues of the </span><span>OAJs in Agriculture are evaluated in the paper. Results indicated the dominance of De Gruyter Open as a publisher with highest number of OAJs, English as a content language, Indonesia with highest number of OAJs, Google scholar </span><span>with highest journals indexed. The study observes the increasing migration of journals from commercial practice to OA. </span><span>Frontiers in Plant Science </span><span>found with highest Impact Factor among OAJs in Agriculture. </span></p></div></div></div>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document