Innovative Surgical Sciences | 2021
The future of scientific publication is Open Access, but needs diversity, equability and equality!
Abstract
Almost 30 years ago, the physicist Paul Ginsparg, at the age of 36 years, installed a server at the Los Alamos National Laboratory to allow the free access to preprints in physics. That can be best described as the foundation of the Open Access movement. It was, however, the increasing financial burden of the “old” subscription model for universities, research institutions and libraries with annual price increases on the one and decreasing financial support on the other hand,which has been a strong argument for Open Access scientific communication, in particular, since the established publishers realized profit margins between 20 and 30% [1]. Subsequently, the Budapest Open Access Initiative in 2001 and the Bethesda Statement as well as the Berlin Declaration, both in 2003, argued for Open Access to scientific knowledge. In recent years, more and more scientific and research organizations as well as libraries from all over the world signed, for example, the Berlin Declaration—667 signatories as of January 2nd, 2021 [2]. Based on these developments, Open Access publications showed a rapid growth between 1993 and 2009, which, since the year 2000, reached an annual average increase of 18% for the number of journals and of 30% for the number of articles. Additionally, in 2009, Open Access articles accounted for almost 8% of all peer-reviewed journal articles [3]. It was calculated that increased Open Access publication results in substantial benefits to research findings [4]. The constant rise of Open Access publications turned out to be an undisputable fact. Between 2009 and 2018, the percentage of Open Access publications in total publications in many nations of the European Union as well as in the USA was as high as 40%, in some countries even close to 50%, and in clinical medicine, 44% of all articles are published Open Access [5]. By looking to these numbers, it becomes clear, that the future of publication in science, technology and mathematics as well as in medicine and in particular in surgery will be Open Access. Even Annals of Surgery, the most prestigious surgical journal worldwide, has recognized the importance of Open Access and launched an Open Access version in September 2020 [6]. It can be postulated, that Open Access increases visibility. Visibility creates citation, citation creates usage und usage creates impact factor [7]. With this in mind, we have to do our utmost to ensure high research quality to impact the right people. Open Access on its own does not do that, but quality research does. These features all together create knowledge which becomes a common good. However, since many questions are still not answered, it is up to us to shape the conditions for Open Access publications. Just recently, some interesting proposals for the future of scientific publishing in the life sciences were suggested, and a transparent review-process, among others, was one suggestion to overcome outdated publishing processes [8]. Since the launchof “InnovativeSurgical Sciences” in 2016, a transparent double-blind peer review process and publication of the reviews together with the article have been a major and among comparable surgical journals still unique feature of the journal. Additionally, the discussion on transparency should address the question of publishing preprints that are peer-reviewedby the scientific community in order to improve the manuscript as well as research activities. In the Covid-19 pandemic, for example, preprints have been essential for rapid dissemination of new findings. However, transparency in the review process is just one issue of relevance. Other factors of future publication refer to the significance of impact factors to assess scientific achievements and the question of negative results, which are often not published, butmay be of importance for future research activities [9]. It becomes more and more evident, that perhaps downloads and other manuscript-oriented altmetrics are of greater interest than just impact factors. And even funding agencies like EMBO (EuropeanMolecular Biology Organization) value personal statements and motivation far more than publication history as they stated in a Lindau Nobel laureate discussion [9]. One other, and probably evenmore relevant issue refers to the participation in open research andOpenAccess. Up till now, research and Joachim Jähne, Clinic for General and Digestive Surgery, Diakovere Friederikenstift and Henriettenstift, Marienstr, 72-90, D-30171 Hannover, Germany, E-mail: [email protected] Innov Surg Sci 2021; 6(2): 49–51