[Is science for everyone? bioethical challenges of current editorial practices]

Q3 Medicine
Silvina Gutiérrez, Jorge Humberto Mukdsi
{"title":"[Is science for everyone? bioethical challenges of current editorial practices]","authors":"Silvina Gutiérrez, Jorge Humberto Mukdsi","doi":"10.31053/1853.0605.v81.n4.46392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As Drumond Rennie put it, ‘Science does not come alive until it is shared publicly’ (1998), emphasising that the rapid advancement of scientific research requires its efficient and rigorous dissemination both to encourage the development of new strategies and to avoid duplication of effort and resources. The current model of scientific and technological research is facing a significant challenge: the cost associated with publishing its results. It is now increasingly common for publishers to impose fees on the scientific community to publish their results, generating debate about the impact of this practice on the fairness of scientific dissemination. Requiring researchers to pay publication costs would limit or exclude research from countries with limited resources, creating significant barriers to the dissemination of knowledge. It has been estimated that costs in some cases are up to ten times higher than what is considered adequate to cover the actual costs of publication (Grossmann & Brembs, 2021). \nThis mismatch raises questions about the justification for such fees and the benefits to funders, given that the funds are often public, or even come from researchers' own pockets.\n\nMoreover, this current model supports a highly lucrative publishing industry, valued at approximately $10 billion (Global $10B Scientific & Technical Publishing Industry Report, 2019-2023), and is possibly one of the main causes of the emergence of so-called Predatory Journals. These journals, sometimes described as fraudulent, appear to be legitimate journals, but in reality distort certain publication practices, with a purely profit-driven ultimate purpose (Elmore & Weston, 2020), representing an ethical violation by exploiting the need of researchers for financial gain without providing true scientific value.\n\nGiven the current landscape, it is crucial to reflect on how these practices affect equity in the dissemination of scientific knowledge?, and how publishing power can limit the dissemination of research on specific pathologies in emerging countries, restricting the right of communities to access crucial information and develop effective public health policies?.\n\nUndoubtedly, equity of access to and distribution of scientific knowledge is a fundamental principle that must be strongly defended. Paying high costs for scientific and technological publication not only jeopardises equal opportunities for researchers from regions with fewer resources, but also affects fairness in the distribution of knowledge. This economic barrier can result in a systematic exclusion of relevant perspectives and data from emerging countries, deepening inequalities and limiting global progress in critical areas such as public health.\n\nConsequently, there is a need to re-examine the current publication model to ensure that science continues to advance in a way that is fair and accessible to all, and to ensure that information vital to public health and scientific progress is not restricted by economic barriers, but is based on principles of fairness and transparency. Indeed, the scientific community must work together to promote the dissemination of knowledge in a manner that is accessible, equitable and free from harmful practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":38814,"journal":{"name":"Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas de Cordoba","volume":"81 4","pages":"636-638"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas de Cordoba","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31053/1853.0605.v81.n4.46392","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As Drumond Rennie put it, ‘Science does not come alive until it is shared publicly’ (1998), emphasising that the rapid advancement of scientific research requires its efficient and rigorous dissemination both to encourage the development of new strategies and to avoid duplication of effort and resources. The current model of scientific and technological research is facing a significant challenge: the cost associated with publishing its results. It is now increasingly common for publishers to impose fees on the scientific community to publish their results, generating debate about the impact of this practice on the fairness of scientific dissemination. Requiring researchers to pay publication costs would limit or exclude research from countries with limited resources, creating significant barriers to the dissemination of knowledge. It has been estimated that costs in some cases are up to ten times higher than what is considered adequate to cover the actual costs of publication (Grossmann & Brembs, 2021). This mismatch raises questions about the justification for such fees and the benefits to funders, given that the funds are often public, or even come from researchers' own pockets. Moreover, this current model supports a highly lucrative publishing industry, valued at approximately $10 billion (Global $10B Scientific & Technical Publishing Industry Report, 2019-2023), and is possibly one of the main causes of the emergence of so-called Predatory Journals. These journals, sometimes described as fraudulent, appear to be legitimate journals, but in reality distort certain publication practices, with a purely profit-driven ultimate purpose (Elmore & Weston, 2020), representing an ethical violation by exploiting the need of researchers for financial gain without providing true scientific value. Given the current landscape, it is crucial to reflect on how these practices affect equity in the dissemination of scientific knowledge?, and how publishing power can limit the dissemination of research on specific pathologies in emerging countries, restricting the right of communities to access crucial information and develop effective public health policies?. Undoubtedly, equity of access to and distribution of scientific knowledge is a fundamental principle that must be strongly defended. Paying high costs for scientific and technological publication not only jeopardises equal opportunities for researchers from regions with fewer resources, but also affects fairness in the distribution of knowledge. This economic barrier can result in a systematic exclusion of relevant perspectives and data from emerging countries, deepening inequalities and limiting global progress in critical areas such as public health. Consequently, there is a need to re-examine the current publication model to ensure that science continues to advance in a way that is fair and accessible to all, and to ensure that information vital to public health and scientific progress is not restricted by economic barriers, but is based on principles of fairness and transparency. Indeed, the scientific community must work together to promote the dissemination of knowledge in a manner that is accessible, equitable and free from harmful practices.

科学适用于所有人吗?
正如德拉蒙德·雷尼(Drumond Rennie)所言,“科学只有在公开分享的情况下才有生命”(1998),他强调,科学研究的快速发展需要有效和严格的传播,以鼓励新战略的发展,并避免努力和资源的重复。目前的科学和技术研究模式正面临着一个重大挑战:与发表其研究结果相关的成本。如今,出版商向科学界收取出版研究成果费用的现象越来越普遍,这引发了一场关于这种做法对科学传播公平性影响的辩论。要求研究人员承担出版费用将限制或排除资源有限国家的研究,为知识的传播制造重大障碍。据估计,在某些情况下,成本高达出版物实际成本的十倍(Grossmann & Brembs, 2021)。这一差距引发了人们对这些费用的合理性以及资助者所获得的利润的质疑,因为资金往往是公共的,甚至是由研究人员自己掏腰包的。此外,目前的模式支撑着一个利润丰厚的出版业,价值约100亿美元(《2019-2023年全球100亿美元科学技术出版业报告》),可能是所谓的掠夺性期刊出现的主要原因之一。这些欺诈性的,有时列为,心底实则成为合法,但实际上扭曲一些杂志披露做法,最终目的纯粹有利可图(Elmore &韦斯,2020年),构成了违反伦理研究爆炸需要获取经济效益,科学无法提供真正的价值。在当前的环境下,反思这些做法如何影响科学知识传播的公平性至关重要。编辑权力如何限制新兴国家特定病理研究的传播,限制社区获得关键信息和制定有效公共卫生政策的权利?毫无疑问,获取和分享科学知识的公平是一项必须大力捍卫的基本原则。为科学和技术出版物支付高额费用不仅危及资源较少地区研究人员的平等机会,而且还影响知识分配的公平性。这种经济壁垒可能导致系统性地排斥新兴国家的相关观点和数据,加深不平等,阻碍公共卫生等关键领域的全球进展。因此,需披露re-examinar现有模式,确保科学公正地继续推进供大家使用,并确保公共卫生至关重要的信息和科学进步,不会受到经济壁垒,而是公正和透明的原则之上。毫无疑问,科学界必须共同努力,以一种可获得的、公平的和不受有害做法影响的方式促进知识的传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Faculty of Medical Sciences is a scientific publication of the Secretariat of Science and Technology of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of the National University of Cordoba. Its objective is to disseminate and promote research work related to Medical and Biological Sciences. It publishes scientific works of national and international professionals on different topics related to health sciences from the field of medicine, nursing, kinesiology, diagnostic imaging, phonoaudiology, nutrition, public health, chemical sciences, dentistry and related.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信