Tomas J Rees, Valérie Philippon, Andrew Liew, Slávka Baróniková, William T Gattrell, Jo Gordon, Taija S Koskenkorva, Santosh Mysore, Joana Osório, Tim J Koder
{"title":"为制药业和研究密集型学术机构的开放存取出版率设定基准","authors":"Tomas J Rees, Valérie Philippon, Andrew Liew, Slávka Baróniková, William T Gattrell, Jo Gordon, Taija S Koskenkorva, Santosh Mysore, Joana Osório, Tim J Koder","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.14.613042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective\nIn biomedical and health sciences, many articles are published open access (OA). Rates of OA publications continue to grow, including for research carried out by pharmaceutical companies. To help drive more openness in the pharmaceutical industry, we aimed to compare the OA publication rates of pharmaceutical companies with those of academic institutions.\nMethods\nWe assessed OA publication rates from the 40 largest pharmaceutical companies by earnings and 40 comparator academic institutions that publish the largest number of medical research articles in their geographical region. Using the Lens, we built a live public dashboard that presents the OA publication rates for articles with authors affiliated to the pharmaceutical companies and comparator academic institutions of interest, detailed by OA model and licence, and by medical therapy area. We performed further analysis on data downloaded from the dashboard.\nResults\nIn our primary analysis of articles 12-24 months since publication date, 76.6% of pharmaceutical company (pharma) and 69.5% of academic institution (academia) publications were OA. The most common OA models were gold (pharma, 37%; academia, 41%) and hybrid (pharma, 22%; academia, 11%). Oncology had lower rates of OA publications than other therapy areas. Growth in the OA publication rate was generally more rapid for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions, regardless of field.\nConclusions\nThe OA publication rate was higher for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions and continues to increase. With the pharmaceutical industry focused on encouraging authors to publish OA and increasingly aware of the different types of OA licences, we expect and welcome further changes. Our new report provides data on pharmaceutical company and academic institution publications that are updated every 2 weeks. We encourage others to use this open resource and report their results.","PeriodicalId":501568,"journal":{"name":"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education","volume":"189 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking open access publication rates for the pharmaceutical industry and research-intensive academic institutions\",\"authors\":\"Tomas J Rees, Valérie Philippon, Andrew Liew, Slávka Baróniková, William T Gattrell, Jo Gordon, Taija S Koskenkorva, Santosh Mysore, Joana Osório, Tim J Koder\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.09.14.613042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective\\nIn biomedical and health sciences, many articles are published open access (OA). Rates of OA publications continue to grow, including for research carried out by pharmaceutical companies. To help drive more openness in the pharmaceutical industry, we aimed to compare the OA publication rates of pharmaceutical companies with those of academic institutions.\\nMethods\\nWe assessed OA publication rates from the 40 largest pharmaceutical companies by earnings and 40 comparator academic institutions that publish the largest number of medical research articles in their geographical region. Using the Lens, we built a live public dashboard that presents the OA publication rates for articles with authors affiliated to the pharmaceutical companies and comparator academic institutions of interest, detailed by OA model and licence, and by medical therapy area. We performed further analysis on data downloaded from the dashboard.\\nResults\\nIn our primary analysis of articles 12-24 months since publication date, 76.6% of pharmaceutical company (pharma) and 69.5% of academic institution (academia) publications were OA. The most common OA models were gold (pharma, 37%; academia, 41%) and hybrid (pharma, 22%; academia, 11%). Oncology had lower rates of OA publications than other therapy areas. Growth in the OA publication rate was generally more rapid for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions, regardless of field.\\nConclusions\\nThe OA publication rate was higher for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions and continues to increase. With the pharmaceutical industry focused on encouraging authors to publish OA and increasingly aware of the different types of OA licences, we expect and welcome further changes. Our new report provides data on pharmaceutical company and academic institution publications that are updated every 2 weeks. We encourage others to use this open resource and report their results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education\",\"volume\":\"189 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613042\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目标在生物医学和健康科学领域,许多文章都是以开放存取(OA)方式发表的。OA 出版率持续增长,包括制药公司开展的研究。为了帮助提高制药行业的开放性,我们旨在比较制药公司和学术机构的 OA 发表率。方法我们评估了 40 家最大制药公司(按收入计算)的 OA 发表率,以及 40 家参照学术机构(在其所在地区发表最多医学研究文章)的 OA 发表率。利用Lens,我们建立了一个实时公共仪表板,按OA模式和许可以及医学治疗领域详细显示了作者隶属于相关制药公司和参照学术机构的文章的OA发表率。我们对从仪表板上下载的数据进行了进一步分析。结果在对自发表之日起12-24个月内的文章进行的主要分析中,76.6%的制药公司(pharma)和69.5%的学术机构(academia)发表的文章为OA。最常见的OA模式是黄金模式(制药公司,37%;学术机构,41%)和混合模式(制药公司,22%;学术机构,11%)。肿瘤学领域的 OA 论文发表率低于其他治疗领域。无论在哪个领域,制药公司的 OA 发表率增长速度普遍高于学术机构。随着制药行业重视鼓励作者发表 OA 论文,并越来越了解不同类型的 OA 许可,我们期待并欢迎进一步的变化。我们的新报告提供了制药公司和学术机构的出版物数据,每两周更新一次。我们鼓励其他人使用这一开放资源并报告其结果。
Benchmarking open access publication rates for the pharmaceutical industry and research-intensive academic institutions
Objective
In biomedical and health sciences, many articles are published open access (OA). Rates of OA publications continue to grow, including for research carried out by pharmaceutical companies. To help drive more openness in the pharmaceutical industry, we aimed to compare the OA publication rates of pharmaceutical companies with those of academic institutions.
Methods
We assessed OA publication rates from the 40 largest pharmaceutical companies by earnings and 40 comparator academic institutions that publish the largest number of medical research articles in their geographical region. Using the Lens, we built a live public dashboard that presents the OA publication rates for articles with authors affiliated to the pharmaceutical companies and comparator academic institutions of interest, detailed by OA model and licence, and by medical therapy area. We performed further analysis on data downloaded from the dashboard.
Results
In our primary analysis of articles 12-24 months since publication date, 76.6% of pharmaceutical company (pharma) and 69.5% of academic institution (academia) publications were OA. The most common OA models were gold (pharma, 37%; academia, 41%) and hybrid (pharma, 22%; academia, 11%). Oncology had lower rates of OA publications than other therapy areas. Growth in the OA publication rate was generally more rapid for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions, regardless of field.
Conclusions
The OA publication rate was higher for pharmaceutical companies than for academic institutions and continues to increase. With the pharmaceutical industry focused on encouraging authors to publish OA and increasingly aware of the different types of OA licences, we expect and welcome further changes. Our new report provides data on pharmaceutical company and academic institution publications that are updated every 2 weeks. We encourage others to use this open resource and report their results.