ReviewF1000Research2016
The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
136 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Identifying the most important facilitators of open research data sharing and reuse in Epidemiology: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Authorship representation in global emergency medicine: a bibliometric analysis from 2016 to 2020.BMJ global health · 2022Pooled it
- Open practices across science, software, education and other domains.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- Ethical Governance of Open Data Across Biomedical Research, Healthcare, and Public Health: Privacy, Equity, Trust, and Controlled Access.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- 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 · 2026Article
- Who Gets to Be Read? Factors Affecting Full-Text Access Rates in Periodontology and Implantology Research.International journal of dental hygiene · 2026Article
- Using Social Media to Maximize the Research Impact of Surgeons: Exploratory Linguistic Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Review
- Why research articles in acute care surgery get rejected: 10 critical mistakes to avoid.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2026Article
- National-, Institutional-, and Individual-Level Determinants of Neurology and Neurosurgery Research Excellence: An Analysis of Stanford-Elsevier Lists of the Top 2% Scholars Worldwide (2017-2023).Neuroepidemiology · 2026Review
- 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 · 2026Article
- 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 · 2026Article
- Editorial excellence and impact on public health: a strategic look from scientific journals of the global south.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 2026Article
- Open Science in Undergraduate Medical Education: An International Framework for Transparency, Responsibility, and Professional Identity Formation.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
- Navigating bibliometric indicators in university rankings: a conceptual framework for strategic research management.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Review
- Iris 128x: open-source 128 channel headstages for neural stimulation and recording.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Evolution of journal rankings in orthopedics and sports medicine (2000-2024) : A SCImago-based bibliometric analysis.Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- The economic impact of open science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Primer on Plain Language Summaries for Advanced Practice Providers With Published Examples and Practical Applications to Practice.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2025Article
- State-of-the-arts methods for studying factors driving the utilization of open science resources.MethodsX · 2025Review
76 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.