[Sigmetrics] Preprint: levels of open access based on Web of Science and oaDOI data

[Andrea Scharnhorst]

Dear Bianca,
Thank you very much for posting this interesting analysis.

As NARCIS, the portal into the Dutch research landscape, is increasingly also harvesting publications, Emil Bode of our research group did an analysis into OA as available in our database. The results are visible here https://www.narcis.nl/metrics/Language/en You will notice, scrolling to the last graphic,  that we don’t disclose the individual universities, which has to do with our awareness of the still large range of error margin in these data and our function as information portal. But, we have the data internally, and it would be interesting to do a comparison.

We are aware that we only harvest a certain part of the publications (as became visible in a study on another topic with CWTS years ago ( https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/en/publications/seedexpand--a-general-methodology-for-detecting-publication-oeuvres-of-individual-researchers(b74001b4-9390-4aac-bb17-cb0c3423ec8f).html ). But, I’m curious to see if trends are similar when using different data collection approaches.

Looking forward to other comments too.

Warmest regards
Andrea Scharnhorst
DANS-KNAW

From: SIGMETRICS <sigmetrics-bounces at asist.org> on behalf of "Kramer, B.M.R. (Bianca)" <B.M.R.Kramer at uu.nl>
Date: Monday, 15 January 2018 at 10:46
To: "sigmetrics at mail.asis.org" <sigmetrics at mail.asis.org>
Subject: [Sigmetrics] Preprint: levels of open access based on Web of Science and oaDOI data

Dear all,

Over the past few weeks we have been test driving the new option in Web of Science to filter publications by OA-status. This option has replaced the earlier filter that only determined OA status at the journal level and thus only had papers from full gold OA journals. The new filter uses oaDOI from ImpactStory and is able to detect much more and at a more granular level (including green, hybrid and 'bronze' OA)

Of course it is early days and there are still methodological and other caveats, but it seemed important to assess if this data could inform the OA and scientometrics community on progress, reliably show the various levels of OA by field, country, institution, funder etc. and point at positive examples.
All this and more, such as a case study of the Netherlands, diving into the various types of OA using additional (open) data from the oaDOI API, is in our preprint at PeerJPreprints that is now live here:

https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3520v1 <https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3520v1>

Of course we shared all the data.

We very much value your feedback. Because researchers and policymakers can now obtain these detailed OA data through a unified approach, it seems important to gauge the value and applicability of the new WoS filter.

We realize that access to Web of Science is a privilege associated with affiliation with rich, mostly Western, universities. This also means that many of the analyses done here, particularly for non-Western countries and institutions, cannot be repeated or applied by the people directly involved or affected. We applaud oaDOI for their commitment to keeping their API free and are looking forward to collaborative initiatives to make information about research output from various entities openly available and reusable.

In the preprint, we also discuss the functionalities and limitations thereof of freely available (not necessarily open) multidisciplinary databases (BASE, Google Scholar and Science Open) for detailed determining of OA levels.

kind regards,
Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman
Utrecht University Library


Abstract:
Across the world there is growing interest in open access publishing among researchers, institutions, funders and publishers alike. It is assumed that open access levels are growing, but hitherto the exact levels and patterns of open access have been hard to determine and detailed quantitative studies are scarce. Using newly available open access status data from oaDOI in Web of Science we are now able to explore year-on-year open access levels across research fields, languages, countries, institutions, funders and topics, and try to relate the resulting patterns to disciplinary, national and institutional contexts. With data from the oaDOI API we also look at the detailed breakdown of open access by types of gold open access (pure gold, hybrid and bronze), using universities in the Netherlands as an example. There is huge diversity in open access levels on all dimensions, with unexpected levels for e.g. Portuguese as language, Astronomy & Astrophysics as research field, countries like Tanzania, Peru and Latvia, and Zika as topic. We explore methodological issues and offer suggestions to improve conditions for tracking open access status of research output. Finally, we suggest potential future applications for research and policy development. We have shared all data and code openly.


[01-innovations-icon-very-small]  101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication<https://101innovations.wordpress.com/about-1/>
...................
Bianca Kramer, PhD | Subject Specialist Life Sciences and Medicine | Utrecht University Library | Heidelberglaan 3 Utrecht NL-3584 CS | www.uu.nl/library<http://www.uu.nl/library> | b.m.r.kramer at uu.nl<mailto:b.m.r.kramer at uu.nl> | +31 6 23 606 406 | room G.01.503 UMC Utrecht | working days Mon-Tue-Thu mornings, Fri all day | www.uu.nl/staff/BMRKramer<http://www.uu.nl/staff/BMRKramer> | Twitter: @MsPhelps<https://twitter.com/MsPhelps>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20180115/aa5d4550/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 996 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20180115/aa5d4550/attachment-0001.jpg>