Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27158456›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2016

The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review.

Jonathan P Tennant, François Waldner, Damien C Jacques, Paola Masuzzo, Lauren B Collister, Chris H J Hartgerink

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 136 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
136citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

136 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Promoting awareness of open access publishing in speech-language therapy and audiology: Lessons from multilingual language assessment research.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2026
    Article
  12. Authorship, titles and open access as drivers of citation performance in orthopaedics: a scientometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

76 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Jonathan P TennantDepartment of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
François WaldnerEarth and Life Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Damien C JacquesEarth and Life Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Paola MasuzzoMedical Biotechnology Center, VIB, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Biochemistry, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Lauren B CollisterUniversity Library System, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Chris H J HartgerinkDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ongoing debates surrounding Open Access to the scholarly literature are multifaceted and complicated by disparate and often polarised viewpoints from engaged stakeholders. At the current stage, Open Access has become such a global issue that it is critical for all involved in scholarly publishing, including policymakers, publishers, research funders, governments, learned societies, librarians, and academic communities, to be well-informed on the history, benefits, and pitfalls of Open Access. In spite of this, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the potential pros and cons of Open Access at multiple levels. This review aims to be a resource for current knowledge on the impacts of Open Access by synthesizing important research in three major areas: academic, economic and societal. While there is clearly much scope for additional research, several key trends are identified, including a broad citation advantage for researchers who publish openly, as well as additional benefits to the non-academic dissemination of their work. The economic impact of Open Access is less well-understood, although it is clear that access to the research literature is key for innovative enterprises, and a range of governmental and non-governmental services. Furthermore, Open Access has the potential to save both publishers and research funders considerable amounts of financial resources, and can provide some economic benefits to traditionally subscription-based journals. The societal impact of Open Access is strong, in particular for advancing citizen science initiatives, and leveling the playing field for researchers in developing countries. Open Access supersedes all potential alternative modes of access to the scholarly literature through enabling unrestricted re-use, and long-term stability independent of financial constraints of traditional publishers that impede knowledge sharing. However, Open Access has the potential to become unsustainable for research communities if high-cost options are allowed to continue to prevail in a widely unregulated scholarly publishing market. Open Access remains only one of the multiple challenges that the scholarly publishing system is currently facing. Yet, it provides one foundation for increasing engagement with researchers regarding ethical standards of publishing and the broader implications of 'Open Research'.

Indexed as

AltmetricsCopyrightIncentive SystemOpen AccessOpen Citation AdvantageOpen Science, Text and Data MiningPublishing

Identifiers

PMID27158456
PMCPMC4837983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.