Publications en libre accès en biologie–médecine : historique et état des lieux en 2016

Abstract

Publications en libre accès en biologie-médecine: historique et état des lieux en 2016 Open access in biology and Medicine : historical review and state of the art in 2016 Titre court Etat des lieux des publications en accès libre en bio-médecine

Worldwide inequality in access to full text scientific articles: the example of ophthalmology

“…However, articles behind paywalls (“paywalled articles”) are still more numerous than “publisher OA” articles in our study (57.5% and 42.5%, respectively). These results are in agreement with the most recent studies, which estimate that, in biology and medicine, 39.1% to 50% of articles published are “publisher OA” articles (Boudry & Durand-Barthez, 2017; Bosman & Kramer, 2018). We found that researchers in ophthalmology working in the 27 institutions included in this study can access only an average of 46.8% (with very large disparities, varying from 0% to 94.8%) of full text “paywalled articles” using their institutional and Hinari access.…”

“…It now seems that Sci Hub will cease to operate only if and when the conditions that make it essential disappear (Lawson, 2017), i.e., that access to the articles through legal channels will not be as unequal as we have shown in this study. To achieve this, in addition to the suggestion mentioned above, several paths can be taken: including more countries in the Hinari program (particularly upper-middle income countries) (Bendezú-Quispe et al, 2016); promoting Green OA (self-archiving in OA repositories) by setting up institutional or national OA policies (Kirsop & Chan, 2005; Machin-Mastromatteo, Uribe-Tirado & Romero-Ortiz, 2016), (e.g., as it has been done recently in France) (Boudry & Durand-Barthez, 2017); and implementing subscription–based access for a reasonable price. This has already been done in other areas, particularly in the field of music, “offering individual subscription-based access to all articles from all imaginable databases for a price that most scientists in any corner of the world could afford” (Strielkowski, 2017).…”

“…This implies that full text articles are only available upon subscription or pay-per-view on publisher websites. One is forced to note that paywalls still limit access to approximately 75% of scholarly documents in all disciplines (Bosman & Kramer, 2018; Piwowar et al, 2018), including biology and medicine (Boudry & Durand-Barthez, 2017; Bosman & Kramer, 2018). Moreover, “paywalled articles” are known to disadvantage the lowest-income countries in terms of access to articles (Aronson, 2004; Himmelstein et al, 2018).…”

Réseaux sociaux académiques et diffusion de la production scientifique des chercheurs en biologie/médecine

“…Ce mouvement, qui a débuté dans les années 1990, s'est concrétisé dans deux directions ; d'une part, par la mise en place d'archives ouvertes institutionnelles nationales (comme HAL Inserm et HAL CNRS, hyper archive en ligne) ou internationales (comme PubMed Central), afin que les chercheurs puissent, dans la mesure des restrictions imposées par certains éditeurs, auto-archiver leur production scientifique, afin d'en rendre le texte intégral librement accessible ; d'autre part, par l'émergence de revues en libre accès, dont le texte intégral des articles est accessible librement. L'absence d'abonnement et donc du revenu y afférent pour leurs éditeurs est alors, en règle générale, compensée par des frais supplémentaires (article processing charge, APC) supportés par les auteurs [13]. Tous ces éléments amènent naturellement à s'interroger quant à la nature des textes intégraux (TI) d'articles déposés sur les réseaux sociaux académiques (RSA).…”