In terms of
high impact journals, nephrology is on the lower end of the impact factor scale
compared to our counterparts in hematology/oncology and cardiology. An emerging option for publishing scientific
data is open access journals. This form
of information sharing is beginning to penetrate the publishing/academic
world. While open access allows for all
to view the article without paying for fees to the journal- are they offering
quality articles? What do nephrologists think about open access journals?
First and
foremost, why would an author want their work published in an open access
journal?
Many reasons exist:-
1. Rapid turn-around and availability to the world to view.
2. The manuscript was rejected by traditional journals.
3. E xperiment a different form of publishing.
1. Rapid turn-around and availability to the world to view.
2. The manuscript was rejected by traditional journals.
3. E xperiment a different form of publishing.
Are “non” PubMed
‘able journals in nephrology worthy for consideration of academic promotion? For
now, it is unclear what “promotion” committees thinks of manuscripts that
appears in these journals.
Let’s take a
few of these journals for example:
Plos One:. Interestingly Plos One has a decent
impact factor (4.0 in 2011) and the turnaround time appears to be quick (told
to give review back in 10 days). The peer review is still a standard process
(i.e. blinding reviews) like any other journal.
Great outlet, popular, PubMed’able – but comes with a cost for
publishing in it. Nephrology papers have
been published in these journals. Check
out this interesting commentary by an author. Here is Wikipedia’s view on Plos One
F1000 research: This is the newer journal.
The concept is interesting. Peer review is open (meaning everyone including the
author knows who the reviewer is) and happens after your manuscript is
online. The peer review is open for all
to view and comment as well. Great
outlet, novel concept, they state it is PubMed’able (but I could not do it yet)-
hopefully it’s coming soon. How fair can
a peer review be if this is open for all to review? I think it’s very hard when a review is not
anonymous to be honest in the review. But let’s see what scientists will think
of this journal. Another downside- cost
for publishing in it. Many
have voiced their concerns regarding this journal. Here
is another one.
The table below I created reviews
some common Open access novel journals in nephrology. Be your own judge
|
Journal
Name and Link
|
Type of
Articles
|
Cost
involved?
|
Pubmed
indexed( Y/N)
|
|
Original
investigations, basic and clinical, case reports, review articles
|
US $1950
after acceptance
|
Yes
|
|
|
Original research,
review articles
|
US $1000 after acceptance
|
Yes
|
|
|
Original(
basic and clinical), review, case reports
|
Cost but
no amount disclosed on website
|
Yes
|
|
|
Case
reports, reviews, images
|
Not
disclosed on website
|
No
|
|
|
Reviews,
Original( basic and clinical), case reports
|
Yes,
varied from 900-1300 based on type of article
|
None I
found on pubmed but on their website it says NIH funded studies will be pub
med indexed
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Yes, 500
Euro
|
No
|
|
|
Original
articles( clinical), reviews, case reports
|
Yes, US
$500
|
No
|
|
|
Reviews,
original articles( clinical)
|
Not
disclosed on website
|
Found one
article in 2009 indexed in pubmed, rest not
|
|
|
Case
reports, original articles( clinical), letters
|
Not
disclosed upfront on website
|
No
|
|
|
Case
reports, reviews, original articles( clinical)
|
US $300
|
No
|
The major concern is damage to the peer review process. Peer
review is extremely important for good science. Eventually a bad paper can be
published somewhere, but sometimes good papers can get published in low impact
journals as well. Publishing quality is
important and unclear to me how the open access is preserving that. PLoS and BioMed Centeral journals are
regarded well among the open journals. Hoax papers
have been published in some open access journals. A list of questionable open access
journals that promotions committee needs to be worried about have been listed
at this website.
Wonder if there is one for nephrology. We should likely come up with a list.
Recently,
the NY
times had done an interesting article on exploitation of scientists for use
of such journals that charge significant amount for publishing. At least, the
good quality opens mention this up front. Many of the low quality ones later
distinguish themselves. Even Nature
had a dark side talk on this.
So, you
decide what you would do? Would love to hear nephrology community thoughts on
this.
The Open Urology &Nephrology Journal does have the publication fee disclosed on its website
ReplyDeletehttp://benthamscience.com/open/tounj/MSandI.htm
PUBLICATION FEES: The publication fee details for each article published in the journal are given below:
Letters/ Case report/Brief Communication: The publication fee for each published Letter/Case report/Brief Communication article submitted is US $600.
Learning From Images: The publication fee for each published Learning From Images article submitted is US $300.
Research Articles: The publication fee for each published Research article is US $800.
Mini-Review Articles: The publication fee for each published Mini Review article is US $600.
Review Articles: The publication fee for each published Review article is US $900.
Book Review: The open access fee for a published book review is US $450.