首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >For 481 biomedical open access journals articles are not searchable in the Directory of Open Access Journals nor in conventional biomedical databases
【2h】

For 481 biomedical open access journals articles are not searchable in the Directory of Open Access Journals nor in conventional biomedical databases

机译:对于481种生物医学开放获取期刊无法在开放获取期刊目录或常规生物医学数据库中搜索文章

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background. Open access (OA) journals allows access to research papers free of charge to the reader. Traditionally, biomedical researchers use databases like MEDLINE and EMBASE to discover new advances. However, biomedical OA journals might not fulfill such databases’ criteria, hindering dissemination. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a database exclusively listing OA journals. The aim of this study was to investigate DOAJ’s coverage of biomedical OA journals compared with the conventional biomedical databases.>Methods. Information on all journals listed in four conventional biomedical databases (MEDLINE, PubMed Central, EMBASE and SCOPUS) and DOAJ were gathered. Journals were included if they were (1) actively publishing, (2) full OA, (3) prospectively indexed in one or more database, and (4) of biomedical subject. Impact factor and journal language were also collected. DOAJ was compared with conventional databases regarding the proportion of journals covered, along with their impact factor and publishing language. The proportion of journals with articles indexed by DOAJ was determined.>Results. In total, 3,236 biomedical OA journals were included in the study. Of the included journals, 86.7% were listed in DOAJ. Combined, the conventional biomedical databases listed 75.0% of the journals; 18.7% in MEDLINE; 36.5% in PubMed Central; 51.5% in SCOPUS and 50.6% in EMBASE. Of the journals in DOAJ, 88.7% published in English and 20.6% had received impact factor for 2012 compared with 93.5% and 26.0%, respectively, for journals in the conventional biomedical databases. A subset of 51.1% and 48.5% of the journals in DOAJ had articles indexed from 2012 and 2013, respectively. Of journals exclusively listed in DOAJ, one journal had received an impact factor for 2012, and 59.6% of the journals had no content from 2013 indexed in DOAJ.>Conclusions. DOAJ is the most complete registry of biomedical OA journals compared with five conventional biomedical databases. However, DOAJ only indexes articles for half of the biomedical journals listed, making it an incomplete source for biomedical research papers in general.
机译:>背景。开放获取(OA)期刊允许读者免费获得研究论文。传统上,生物医学研究人员使用MEDLINE和EMBASE等数据库来发现新进展。但是,生物医学OA期刊可能不符合此类数据库的标准,从而阻碍了传播。开放存取期刊目录(DOAJ)是专门列出OA期刊的数据库。这项研究的目的是调查DOAJ与常规生物医学数据库相比对DOAJ的生物医学OA期刊的覆盖率。和DOAJ聚集了。如果期刊是(1)积极出版,(2)完整OA,(3)在一个或多个数据库中前瞻性索引以及(4)生物医学主题,则将其包括在内。还收集了影响因子和期刊语言。将DOAJ与传统数据库进行比较,以涵盖期刊的比例,影响因子和出版语言。确定了DOAJ收录有文章的期刊的比例。>结果。研究共纳入3,236种生物医学OA期刊。在收录的期刊中,DOAJ列出了86.7%。常规生物医学数据库合计占期刊的75.0%;在MEDLINE中占18.7%;在PubMed Central中占36.5%; SCOPUS中为51.5%,EMBASE中为50.6%。在DOAJ的期刊中,以英语出版的期刊占88.7%,在2012年获得了20.6%的影响因子,而传统生物医学数据库中的期刊分别获得了93.5%和26.0%的影响因子。 DOAJ中51.1%和48.5%的期刊分别有2012年和2013年的文章索引。在DOAJ专门列出的期刊中,有一种期刊受到了2012年的影响因子,而59.6%的期刊从2013年起就没有在DOAJ中编入索引。>结论。 DOAJ是最完整的生物医学OA注册机构与五个常规生物医学数据库进行比较。但是,DOAJ仅对列出的一半生物医学期刊的文章进行索引,因此一般而言,它不完全是生物医学研究论文的来源。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号