There has been much talk recently on open access publishing and the costs associated with this mode of publication. While editor-in-chief positions within most scientific journals are academic roles involved with the overall content published within journals and not the monetary aspects of this industry, we thought it important to discuss the different models of publication given their use has real effects on both authors and readers of the manuscripts received and published.
Publishing companies are businesses. In traditional publishing models, publishers make money off subscriptions that are paid by individuals who subscribe to the journal or by societies, institutions, libraries or companies that provide the subscription to their members. While publishing is “free” for the authors, the authors give up copyright for the publication to the journal and only those with access to the journal via subscriptions can view the information within the manuscript. This potentially creates a biased system in which larger or well-funded institutions have nearly unlimited access to published science while those in smaller institutions or those not affiliated with academic groups have decreased ease of accessibility. At the same time, a not insignificant portion of scientific output is supported by grants from federal or public funding sources. If these data are released via traditional models of publishing, the results of this federally funded research may not be accessible by all who “paid” for it with their taxes!
Open access models of publishing attempt to correct this bias and loss of author intellectual property by making research openly available to everyone to read/access by removing subscription fees or paywalls for article use. Authors retain copyright, and the publisher in turn makes money from article publishing charges (APC) for each specific manuscript published. In addition to leveling the playing field for academic researchers’ access to scientific data, articles published open access have demonstrated increased readership, downloads and citations.1-3 Journals may be fully open access or hybrid models that provide both subscription and open access options for authors. In both journal types, there is an established editorial leadership structure with editorial boards and peer-review selection of articles published. This differs from so-called “predatory” journals which have sprung up with the creation of open-access publishing that lack significant adjudication and are purely “pay-for-publish.”
In 2018, a group of funding organizations announced the cOAlition S initiative (Plan S), which included the main goal of mandating all scholarly publications funded by grants provided by national, regional and international research councils or funding bodies be published open access by 2021.4 This plan had initial support of the European Commission and the European Research Council, but the United States Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) declined to join the initiative. Subsequently, in 2022, the OSTP issued a mandate to make all federally funded research freely available with a deadline of Dec. 31, 2025, for federal departments and agencies to update their policies.5 At that time, results of funded research will be accessible via open access.
Despite the obvious advantages, challenges remain to full adoption of the open access model. In open access, APCs become the responsibility of authors and/or their institutions rather than subscribers or libraries. In Europe, due to the adaptation of Plan S, APC responsibility has shifted primarily to institutions. In North America, negotiation of “transformative agreements” between institutions and publishers is pursuing a similar goal, albeit through a less standardized process. Authors supported by these institutional agreements, such as faculty at the University of California system and many others, have their APCs subsidized in part or in whole by their employer. As more institutions negotiate similar agreements with major publishing houses, a more equitable balance is being achieved between access to new knowledge and the expense of compiling and reporting it.
The value that experienced publishers bring to the compilation and verification of new knowledge is substantial, enhancing the rigor and reproducibility of biomedical research and, hopefully, improving access and outcomes for all. As publishing models evolve, all stakeholders in academic publishing (authors, professional societies, funders, academic institutions and publishers) need to adopt sustainable business practices that recognize and reward academic excellence. In some cases, research funding organizations should cover APC expenses as part of the overall cost of conducting and publicizing research, as the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation already do. In others, sponsoring institutions should account for the cost of publishing peer-reviewed research results in a manner analogous to how they underwrite expenses required to create new knowledge, in the form of research space and similar infrastructure investments. Expectations regarding faculty research productivity should include underwriting for reasonably anticipatable publishing expenses.
For non-affiliated authors reporting self-funded research, open access APCs unfortunately add to the expense and complexity of reporting results, potentially stifling innovation and advancement of patient care. At the Journal of Vascular Surgery portfolio of journals, we are committed to helping all authors find the most efficacious and impactful pathway to publication of deserving science, including the provision of APC waivers when available and appropriate, as new funding models continue to evolve. Ultimately, the transition to open access promises to advance the interests of all stakeholders in academic publishing, including the public and the patients we serve. As authors and fellow members of the Society for Vascular Surgery, we appreciate your patience and forbearance as we navigate this transition together.
References
- Patel RB, Vaduganathan M, Mosarla RC, Venkateswaran RV, Bhatt DL, Bonow RO. Open access publishing and subsequent citations among articles in major cardiovascular journals. Am J Med. 2019 Sep;132(9):1103–1105.
- Alkhawtani RHM, Kwee TC, Kwee RM. Citation advantage for open access articles in European radiology. Eur Radiol. 2020 Jan;30(1):482– 486.
- Davis PM, Lewenstein BV, Simon DH, Booth JG, Connolly MJ. Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: Randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2008 Jul 31;337:a568.
- https://www.coalition-s.org/, accessed March 25, 2024.
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news-updates/2022/08/25/ostp-issues-guidance-to-make-federally-funded-research-freely-available-without-delay/, accessed March 25, 2024.
Matthew R. Smeds, MD, is the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Vascular Surgery-Cases, Innovations and Techniques. Ronald L. Dalman, MD, is the executive editor of the Journal of Vascular Surgery portfolio of journals.
