Dataset Information

A study of institutional spending on open access publication fees in Germany.

ABSTRACT: Publication fees as a revenue source for open access publishing hold a prominent place on the agendas of researchers, policy makers, and academic publishers. This study contributes to the evolving empirical basis for funding these charges and examines how much German universities and research organisations spent on open access publication fees. Using self-reported cost data from the Open APC initiative, the analysis focused on the amount that was being spent on publication fees, and compared these expenditure with data from related Austrian (FWF) and UK (Wellcome Trust, Jisc) initiatives, in terms of both size and the proportion of articles being published in fully and hybrid open access journals. We also investigated how thoroughly self-reported articles were indexed in Crossref, a DOI minting agency for scholarly literature, and analysed how the institutional spending was distributed across publishers and journal titles. According to self-reported data from 30 German universities and research organisations between 2005 and 2015, expenditures on open access publication fees increased over the years in Germany and amounted to € 9,627,537 for 7,417 open access journal articles. The average payment was € 1,298, and the median was € 1,231. A total of 94% of the total article volume included in the study was supported in accordance with the price cap of € 2,000, a limit imposed by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of its funding activities for open access funding at German universities. Expenditures varied considerably at the institutional level. There were also differences in how much the institutions spent per journal and publisher. These differences reflect, at least in part, the varying pricing schemes in place including discounted publication fees. With an indexing coverage of 99%, Crossref thoroughly indexed the open access journals articles included in the study. A comparison with the related openly available cost data from Austria and the UK revealed that German universities and research organisations primarily funded articles in fully open access journals. By contrast, articles in hybrid journal accounted for the largest share of spending according to the Austrian and UK data. Fees paid for hybrid journals were on average more expensive than those paid for fully open access journals.

SUBMITTER: Jahn N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4991862 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A study of institutional spending on open access publication fees in Germany.

Jahn Najko N Tullney Marco M

PeerJ 20160809

Publication fees as a revenue source for open access publishing hold a prominent place on the agendas of researchers, policy makers, and academic publishers. This study contributes to the evolving empirical basis for funding these charges and examines how much German universities and research organisations spent on open access publication fees. Using self-reported cost data from the Open APC initiative, the analysis focused on the amount that was being spent on publication fees, and compared the ...[more]

PMID: 27602289

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background. Open access (OA) publishing via article processing charges (APCs) is growing as an alternative to subscription publishing. The Pay It Forward (PIF) Project is exploring the feasibility of transitioning from paying subscriptions to funding APCs for faculty at research intensive universities. Estimating of the cost of APCs for the journals authors at research intensive universities tend to publish is essential for the PIF project and similar initiatives. This paper presents our research into this question. Methods. We identified APC prices for publications by authors at the 4 research intensive United States (US) and Canadian universities involved in the study. We also obtained APC payment records from several Western European universities and funding agencies. Both data sets were merged with Web of Science (WoS) metadata. We calculated the average APCs for articles and proceedings in 13 discipline categories published by researchers at research intensive universities. We also identified 41 journals published by traditionally subscription publishers which have recently converted to APC funded OA and recorded the APCs they charge. Results. We identified 7,629 payment records from the 4 European APC payment databases and 14,356 OA articles authored by PIF partner university faculty for which we had listed APC prices. APCs for full OA journals published by PIF authors averaged 1,775 USD; full OA journal APCs paid by Western European funders averaged 1,865 USD; hybrid APCs paid by Western European funders averaged 2,887 USD. The APC for converted journals published by major subscription publishers averaged 1,825 USD. APC funded OA is concentrated in the life and basic sciences. APCs funded articles in the social sciences and humanities are often multidisciplinary and published in journals such as PLOS ONE that largely publish in the life sciences. Conclusions. Full OA journal APCs average a little under 2,000 USD while hybrid articles average about 3,000 USD for publications by researchers at research intensive universities. There is a lack of information on discipline differences in APCs due to the concentration of APC funded publications in a few fields and the multidisciplinary nature of research.

Project description:Open access publication rates have been steadily increasing over time. In spite of this growth, academics in low income settings struggle to gain access to the full canon of research literature. While the vast majority of open access repositories and funding organizations with open access policies are based in high income countries, the geographic patterns of open access publication itself are not well characterized. In this study, we developed a computational approach to better understand the topical and geographical landscape of open access publications in the biomedical research literature. Surprisingly, we found a strong negative correlation between country per capita income and the percentage of open access publication. Open access publication rates were particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa, but vastly lower in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and East Asia and the Pacific. These effects persisted when considering papers only bearing authors from within each region and income group. However, papers resulting from international collaborations did have a higher percentage of OA than single-country papers, and inter-regional collaboration increased OA publication for all world regions. There was no clear relationship between the number of open access policies in a region and the percentage of open access publications in that region. To understand the distribution of open access across topics of biomedical research, we examined keywords that were most enriched and depleted in open access papers. Keywords related to genomics, computational biology, animal models, and infectious disease were enriched in open access publications, while keywords related to the environment, nursing, and surgery were depleted in open access publications. This work identifies geographic regions and fields of research that could be priority areas for open access advocacy. The finding that open access publication rates are highest in sub-Saharan Africa and low income countries suggests that factors other than open access policy strongly influence authors' decisions to make their work openly accessible. The high proportion of OA resulting from international collaborations indicates yet another benefit of collaborative research. Certain applied fields of medical research, notably nursing, surgery, and environmental fields, appear to have a greater proportion of fee-for-access publications, which presumably creates barriers that prevent researchers and practitioners in low income settings from accessing the literature in those fields.

Project description:Background:This study involved a sensory evaluation of edoxaban orally disintegrating (OD) tablets in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who had been receiving the existing edoxaban film-coated tablets before the study. Methods:Edoxaban OD tablets 30 or 60 mg were prescribed for patients who had been receiving the existing 30- or 60-mg edoxaban film-coated tablets before the study. Each dose group was randomized into groups taking the tablets with or without water. After ingestion of the edoxaban OD tablet, each patient was asked to complete a sensory evaluation questionnaire (12 items). Results:In the evaluation of satisfaction with edoxaban OD tablets, 52.8% of the patients perceived "no difference" from the existing edoxaban film-coated tablets and 34.9% indicated that they were more satisfied with the OD tablets, thus demonstrating a relatively high degree of satisfaction. When asked about convenience and reliability in using edoxaban OD tablets, about half of the patients perceived "no difference" from the existing edoxaban film-coated tablets and the remaining half indicated preference for the OD tablets. Responses about taste, flavor, ease of ingestion, and motivation to continue taking edoxaban indicated the overall acceptance of the OD tablets. Recognition of edoxaban OD tablets was rated as "easy" by about half of the patients and "difficult" by the remaining half. Among all patients, 49.5% preferred a change to edoxaban OD tablets. The degree of satisfaction with taste, flavor, and ease of ingestion, as well as overall satisfaction, tended to be greater when the OD tablets were taken with rather than without water, and the percentage of patients who preferred a change was higher in the group taking the OD tablets with water. Conclusions:This study indicated that the degree of satisfaction with taste, flavor, ease of ingestion, and convenience, as well as overall satisfaction, in addition to motivation to continue drug intake and sense of confidence were greater for OD tablets than for the existing edoxaban film-coated tablets. Edoxaban OD tablet is a promising formulation for inducing greater patient adherence to medication and therefore ensures better treatment response. Trial registration:UMIN-CTR UMIN000028788, registered 23-Aug-2017.

Dataset Information

A study of institutional spending on open access publication fees in Germany.

Publications

A study of institutional spending on open access publication fees in Germany.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets