Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.

<h4>Aims</h4>Over the last two decades, the existence of an open access citation advantage (OACA)-increased citation of articles made available open access (OA)-has been the topic of much discussion. While there has been substantial research to address this question, findings have been c...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Allison Langham-Putrow, Caitlin Bakker, Amy Riegelman
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/99444c984a2b4338a0f55ab194ba1620
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:99444c984a2b4338a0f55ab194ba1620
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:99444c984a2b4338a0f55ab194ba16202021-12-02T20:10:12ZIs the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0253129https://doaj.org/article/99444c984a2b4338a0f55ab194ba16202021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253129https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Aims</h4>Over the last two decades, the existence of an open access citation advantage (OACA)-increased citation of articles made available open access (OA)-has been the topic of much discussion. While there has been substantial research to address this question, findings have been contradictory and inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review to compare studies of citations to OA and non-OA articles.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search of 17 databases attempted to capture all relevant studies authored since 2001. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. We included studies with a direct comparison between OA and non-OA items and reported article-level citation as an outcome. Both randomized and non-randomized studies were included. No limitations were placed on study design, language, or publication type.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 5,744 items were retrieved. Ultimately, 134 items were identified for inclusion. 64 studies (47.8%) confirmed the existence of OACA, while 37 (27.6%) found that it did not exist, 32 (23.9%) found OACA only in subsets of their sample, and 1 study (0.8%) was inconclusive. Studies with a focus on multiple disciplines were significantly positively associated with finding that OACA exists in subsets, and are less associated with finding that OACA did not exist. In the critical appraisal of the included studies, 3 were found to have an overall low risk of bias. Of these, one found that an OACA existed, one found that it did not, and one found that an OACA occurred in subsets.<h4>Conclusions</h4>As seen through the large number of studies identified for this review, OACA is a topic of continuing interest. Quality and heterogeneity of the component studies pose challenges for generalization. The results suggest the need for reporting guidelines for bibliometrics studies.Allison Langham-PutrowCaitlin BakkerAmy RiegelmanPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 6, p e0253129 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Allison Langham-Putrow Caitlin Bakker Amy Riegelman Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
description	<h4>Aims</h4>Over the last two decades, the existence of an open access citation advantage (OACA)-increased citation of articles made available open access (OA)-has been the topic of much discussion. While there has been substantial research to address this question, findings have been contradictory and inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review to compare studies of citations to OA and non-OA articles.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search of 17 databases attempted to capture all relevant studies authored since 2001. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. We included studies with a direct comparison between OA and non-OA items and reported article-level citation as an outcome. Both randomized and non-randomized studies were included. No limitations were placed on study design, language, or publication type.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 5,744 items were retrieved. Ultimately, 134 items were identified for inclusion. 64 studies (47.8%) confirmed the existence of OACA, while 37 (27.6%) found that it did not exist, 32 (23.9%) found OACA only in subsets of their sample, and 1 study (0.8%) was inconclusive. Studies with a focus on multiple disciplines were significantly positively associated with finding that OACA exists in subsets, and are less associated with finding that OACA did not exist. In the critical appraisal of the included studies, 3 were found to have an overall low risk of bias. Of these, one found that an OACA existed, one found that it did not, and one found that an OACA occurred in subsets.<h4>Conclusions</h4>As seen through the large number of studies identified for this review, OACA is a topic of continuing interest. Quality and heterogeneity of the component studies pose challenges for generalization. The results suggest the need for reporting guidelines for bibliometrics studies.
format	article
author	Allison Langham-Putrow Caitlin Bakker Amy Riegelman
author_facet	Allison Langham-Putrow Caitlin Bakker Amy Riegelman
author_sort	Allison Langham-Putrow
title	Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
title_short	Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
title_full	Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
title_fullStr	Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
title_full_unstemmed	Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
title_sort	is the open access citation advantage real? a systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/99444c984a2b4338a0f55ab194ba1620
work_keys_str_mv	AT allisonlanghamputrow istheopenaccesscitationadvantagerealasystematicreviewofthecitationofopenaccessandsubscriptionbasedarticles AT caitlinbakker istheopenaccesscitationadvantagerealasystematicreviewofthecitationofopenaccessandsubscriptionbasedarticles AT amyriegelman istheopenaccesscitationadvantagerealasystematicreviewofthecitationofopenaccessandsubscriptionbasedarticles
_version_	1718375013672812544

Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles.

Ejemplares similares