ArticlePloS one2026
Diamond Open Access publishing practices among researchers in Ghana.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The rise of Diamond Open Access (DOA) represents a major transformation in scholarly communication, redefining traditional systems of knowledge distribution. Diamond open access model has gained recognition as the most equitable and sustainable form of open access publishing. This study aimed to assess the awareness, perception and knowledge of DOA publishing practices among researchers in Ghana. A cross-sectional study design was used to conveniently collect data from 237 researchers across various institutions in Ghana. Data were collected using structured questionnaires Via Microsoft Forms and analysed using STATA version 17. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, ANOVA, factor analysis, Fisher's exact test and logistic regression were conducted to identify patterns and relationships in the data. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 with a 95% confidence interval. Over half of the participants had no prior experience with Open Access (OA) publishing whilst about two-third of them had never heard of DOA. Only a small proportion could correctly identify the CC BY license, reflecting limited understanding of open licensing. Most of the respondents demonstrated poor knowledge of DOA, with many knowing about the concept through peers and informal networks. Knowledge of DOA was significantly associated with age, type of institution, current rank, and level of academic qualification. Perceived benefits of DOA, particularly regarding visibility and dissemination, differed significantly by current rank and academic qualification. The findings underscore the need for strong policy and institutional reforms to enhance awareness and adoption of DOA in Ghana. Universities and research institutions should develop clear OA and DOA policies, integrate open-access education into research training, and establish sustainable funding mechanisms to support equitable publishing. Strengthening library led advocacy, creating institutional repositories, and fostering national collaboration among academic bodies and policymakers are vital to promote transparency, inclusivity, and global visibility in scholarly communication.
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.