Current status and flow analysis of posted papers in Biorxiv

TSUNODA, Hiroyuki and SUN, Yuan and NISHIZAWA, Masaki and LIU, Xiaomin and AMANO, Kou (2019) Current status and flow analysis of posted papers in Biorxiv. Paper presented at: IFLA WLIC 2019 - Athens, Greece - Libraries: dialogue for change in Session 113c - IFLA Poster Session.

Bookmark or cite this item: http://library.ifla.org/id/eprint/2665
[img]
Preview
Language: English (Original)
Available under licence Creative Commons Attribution.

Abstract

Current status and flow analysis of posted papers in Biorxiv

This poster aims to clarify the current status of the bioRχiv archive. This study conducted an analysis of papers posted on bioRχiv from November 7, 2013 to February 28, 2019. The web crawler we developed for this purpose visited every page on bioRχiv and downloaded metadata including the title, authors, published digital object identifier (DOI), posted date, and versions of a paper. If the paper was published, it would download the journal title and the published DOI. Next, the metadata were manually verified. Open access journals were defined by adopting an open access publishing model according to Directory of Open Access Journals, Web of Science Selected Open Access (OA) by Clarivate Analytics, or the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources. 43,812 papers had been posted on bioRχiv. 17,818 papers were published in academic journals. The average publication rate for more than 15 months was uniform at around 67%. Among these, the journals of 8,664 published papers were recorded by the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Web of Science Selected OA, or the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources. The average open access rate was uniform at around 49%. Hybrid open access journals were defined as those that held papers with a Creative Commons license issued by Impactstory’s Unpaywall Database, or the public access papers located on a publisher’s site. However, these journals were not listed as OA. 12,453 papers were published in open access journals or hybrid open access journals. The average open rate was uniform at around 77%. The conclusions show that the OA model is widely accepted, and has been adopted not only in publishing, but also during the writing process. The concept of “openness” and its practice in academia has inevitably affected the organization of library resources, resource management methods, and service models.

FOR IFLA HQ (login required)

Edit item Edit item
.