Purchase this article with an account.
Michael Mimouni, Yoreh Barak, Yinon Shapira, Itzchak Beiran, Eytan Z Blumenthal, Shiri Zayit-Soudry; Citation Rates of Open-Access and Non-Open Access Clinical Studies in Leading Ophthalmology Journals. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):5716.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To compare the citation rates of open-access (OA) and non-open access (non-OA) ophthalmology publications over a period of 10 years.
Using the PubMed Search engine, we conducted an observational study of citations rates of clinical study publications from 6 leading ophthalmology journals between January 2005 and December 2014. All publications were categorized as either OA (free full-text accessible from PubMed) or non-OA and data regarding characteristics with possible effect on outcome measures were collected. Main outcome measures included the likelihood of the OA publications surveyed to be cited at least once compared to non-OA publications, and the accrued rates of citations of OA versus non-OA publications.
Of the 1,984 published articles included in the study, 20.9% (n=415) were OA. Multivariate analysis, adjusted for the year of publication, identified study group collaboration (OR=4.99), higher number of listed authors (OR=1.13), and OA publication (OR=2.52) (p<0.001) to be associated with a higher likelihood of being cited at least once. Overall, OA publications accrued higher citation rates compared to non-OA publications (14.6 ± 23.4 versus 9.3 ± 15.3, p<0.001). Additional factors associated with higher accumulated citation rates were publications in general ophthalmology journals (12.5 ± 19.3 versus 6.3 ± 7.3 for subspecialty journals, p<0.001), study group collaboration (20.9 ± 28.4 versus 8.6 ± 12.1, p<0.001), first author affiliated with the USA (15.4 ± 22.6 versus 8.2 ± 11.2, p<0.001), NIH funding (17.1 ± 25.2 versus 10.0 ± 15.3, p<0.001) and higher number of authors (r=0.28, p<0.001). After adjustment of multivariate analysis for the year of publication, factors associated with higher accumulated citation rates were number of listed authors (F=85.31), study group collaboration (F=55.84), USA affiliation (F=27.01) and publication in general ophthalmology journals (F=7.45) (p<0.001), while OA publications were no longer significantly associated with higher citation rates (F=2.54, p=0.11).
Though OA ophthalmology publications are more likely to receive at least one citation, in the long run, they are not associated with overall higher citation rates compared to non OA ophthalmology publications.
This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only