Is it worth publishing Open Access? - the scientific impact of Open Access publications in the field of medical education

开放获取出版值得吗?——开放获取出版物在医学教育领域的科学影响

阅读:2

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In medical education research, the transfer of knowledge depends heavily on the visibility of scientific publications. Whether Open Access (OA) actually increases this visibility through a citation advantage (Open Access Citation Advantage, OACA) is still unclear for the field of medical education. This study aims to determine the existence and size of an OACA for medical education articles indexed in PubMed between 2010 and 2019. METHOD: In a retrospective bibliometric cohort study, all entries classified as research articles by iCite® with the MeSH term 'Medical Education' (N = 43,275) were analysed. OA was defined by the presence of a PubMed Central identifier (PMCID). Primary endpoints were total citations, citations per year, and the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR). Group comparisons were made using Yuen‑Welch t‑tests (20 % trimmed means, α = 0.05). Sensitivity analyses included negative binomial regression with year and journal fixed effects, and quantile regression for RCR. RESULTS: 21.2% of articles had a PMCID. PMCID-indexed publications showed higher trimmed means for total citations (10.31 vs. 7.00), annual citations (1.29 vs. 0.79), and RCR (0.79 vs. 0.49; all p < .001). Robust effect sizes (δˆRAKP, Algina-Keselman-Penfield robust standardized difference) ranged from 0.27 to 0.35 (small to medium). Negative binomial models with year and journal fixed effects confirmed these findings (IRR range: 1.53-1.67). CONCLUSIONS: PMCID-indexed articles in the field of medical education are cited significantly more frequently and have higher field‑normalised impact values than non‑OA publications. Despite financial hurdles and methodological limitations including potential selection bias, the moderate OACA supports strategically expanding OA publication funds to maximise the reach and impact of medical education research. Prospective studies should consider different OA types, altmetrics, and potential confounders to pinpoint the impacts of OA.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。