Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24384939›Full record

ReviewInternational orthopaedics2014

Open access publishing: a study of current practices in orthopaedic research.

Sanjeeve Sabharwal, Nirav Patel, Karanjeev Johal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International orthopaedics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Equity in Orthopaedic Knowledge, Open-Access Trends Among the Top 1,000 Cited Articles in Orthopaedic Surgery.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026
    Article
  2. Pediatric Orthopaedic Studies Published Open Access are Associated with Increased Citation Rates.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2024
    Article
  3. Positive Correlation Between Social Media Utilization by Orthopaedic Journals and Impact Factor.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Current Status and Trends in Research on Caries Diagnosis: A Bibliometric Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. A bibliometric analysis of the spine journals.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Predatory Publishing Is a Threat to Non-Mainstream Science.Journal of Korean medical science · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Predatory publishing, questionable peer review, and fraudulent conferences.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2014
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sanjeeve SabharwalDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, 10th Floor QEQM building, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK, sanjeeve.sabharwal@ic.ac.uk.
Nirav Patel
Karanjeev Johal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpen access (OA) publications have changed the paradigm of dissemination of scientific research. Their benefits to low-income countries underline their value; however, critics question exorbitant publication fees as well as their effect on the peer review process and research quality. PURPOSE: This study reports on the prevalence of OA publishing in orthopaedic research and compares benchmark citation indices as well as evidence quality derived from OA journals with conventional subscription based orthopaedic journals.

methodsAll 63 orthopaedic journals listed in ISI's Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Report (JCR) were examined. Bibliometric data attributed to each journal for the year 2012 was acquired from the JCR. Studies that fulfilled the criteria of level I evidence were identified for each journal within PubMed. Individual journal websites were reviewed to identify their open access policy. A total of 38 (60.3 %) journals did not offer any form of OA publishing; however, 20 (31.7 %) hybrid journals were identified which offered authors the choice to publish their work as OA if a publication fee was paid. Only five (8 %) journals published all their articles as OA. There was variability amongst the different publication fees for OA articles. Journals that published OA articles did not differ from subscription based journals on the basis of 2012 impact factor, citation number, self citation proportion or the volume of level I evidence published (p > 0.05).

conclusionsOA journals are present in orthopaedic research, though in small numbers. Over a third of orthopaedic journals catalogued in the ISI Web of Knowledge JCR® are hybrid journals that provide authors with the opportunity to publish their articles as OA after a publication fee is paid. This study suggests equivalent importance and quality of articles between OA and subscription based orthopaedic journals based on bibliometric data and the volume of level I evidence produced. Orthopaedic researchers must recognize the potential benefits of OA publishing and its emerging presence within the field. Further examination and consensus is required in orthopaedic research to generate an OA system that is robustly regulated and maintains research quality.

Indexed as

Access to InformationBiomedical ResearchOrthopedicsBenchmarkingBibliometricsPublishing

Identifiers

PMID24384939
PMCPMC4037500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.