ArticlePloS one2018
Scientific impact increases when researchers publish in open access and international collaboration: A bibliometric analysis on poverty-related disease papers.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- The impact of institutional repositories: a systematic review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Pooled it
- EU-Africa partnerships in health research from 2014 to 2023: Outputs and lessons learnt.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Limitations of current copyright frameworks for large language models trained on scientific literature.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Global trends of positive deviance research in public health: A bibliometric analysis (1976-2024).Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- The academic impact of Open Science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Cross-site collaboration on infection prevention and control research-room for improvement? A 7-year comparative study in five European countries.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2022Article
- Article
- Does health-related poverty publication landscape reflect global needs in the light of the current poverty rebound?Globalization and health · 2022Article
- Research artifacts and citations in computer systems papers.PeerJ. Computer science · 2022Article
- Analysis of Eastern Asia's Contributions to Major Orthopaedic Journals in the Past 21 Years.Cureus · 2022Article
- Mapping theme trends and recognizing hot spots in viral pneumonia: a bibliometric analysis of global research.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- Do open-access dermatology articles have higher citation counts than those with subscription-based access?PloS one · 2022Article
- Creating equity in health research to drive more and better evidence.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
- Generational differences in international research collaboration: A bibliometric study of Norwegian University staff.PloS one · 2021Article
- Letter to the Editor Regarding "A Bibliographic Analysis of the Most Cited Articles in Global Neurosurgery".World neurosurgery · 2021Article
- Socialization During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Social and Scientific Networks During Social Distancing.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021Article
- 30 years of parasitology research analysed by text mining.Parasitology · 2020Article
- Article processing charges are stalling the progress of African researchers: a call for urgent reforms.BMJ global health · 2020Article
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
backgroundThe European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), like many other research funders, requires its grantees to make papers available via open access (OA). This article investigates the effect of publishing in OA journals and international collaboration within and between European and sub-Saharan African countries on citation impact and likelihood of falling into the top 1% and top 10% most cited papers in poverty-related disease (PRD) research.
methodsDisease-specific research publications were identified in the Web of Science™ and MEDLINE using Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. Data on the open accessibility of scientific literature were derived from 1science oaFindr. Publication data, including relative citation counts, were extracted for 2003-2015. Regression models were applied to quantify the relationship between relative citations and presence in the 1% and top 10% most cited papers versus OA and international collaboration.
resultsThe results show that since 2003 papers on PRDs have become increasingly available in OA. Among all PRD areas, malaria research is most frequently published in OA and in international collaboration. The adjusted regression analyses show that holding other factors constant, publishing research in OA and in international collaboration has a significant and meaningful citation advantage over non-OA or non-international collaborative research. Publishing papers as part of a European-wide or European- sub-Saharan African collaboration increases research impact. In contrast, such collaboration advantage is not observed for research output involving sub-Saharan Africa only which seems to decrease research impact.
conclusionsOur results indicate that there is a real, measurable citation advantage for publishing PRD research in OA and international collaboration. However, the international collaboration advantage seems to be region-specific with increased research impact for European-wide and European-sub-Saharan African collaborations but a decrease in research impact of collaborations confined to sub-Saharan African research institutions. Further research is required to further verify this finding and to understand the underlying factors related to this observed decrease in research impact. To target future research capacity building activities in sub-Saharan Africa it is important to assess whether the observed decreased impact reflects the scientific competencies and geographic distribution of individual researchers or institutional-, national- or funder-specific research requirements.
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.