 Hello, this is Caitlin and I am the Scholarly Communication Informationist at the Welch Medical Library at Johns Hopkins University, and this is the Welch class about open access publishing. The objectives that I have today include identifying and describing open access terminology, and these are the key terms that will help you be able to apply them to different publisher policies. We also hope that we can describe the value of open access to research and apply it to stakeholders and outline library resources that can help you with publishing needs, whether or not they are open access publishing. But first I want to start with describing what open access is, and this includes research that is digital, free to access, and free of many copyright and licensing restrictions where you might see that all rights reserved. Many open access publications will not have that all rights reserved copyright. We're going to talk a little bit more about Creative Commons licenses later. There are a lot of similarities between the two and what I'll call publication models. In a subscription model and an open access model, they will both have editorial boards. The journal should be peer reviewed. It should be indexed in Medline and other indexing services. This is not always the case when you're assessing perhaps quality of an open access journal, for example. Not all journals will be indexed in Medline, especially if they're newer. They haven't had the opportunity to apply to be indexed in some of these services. So that's just an aside. But where the differences really lie in a subscription model is first that readers pay to access. This is not just readers. This is institutions. This is libraries. They pay the publishers to get access to subscription packages or subscription journals and get access for readers. Copyright is also usually kept by the publisher, and that's where you see that permissions and restrictions coming in to play. In an open access model, the author pays, and I have sometimes here, the author does not always pay. What you might see are what we call article processing charges or APCs. This is a common practice with a lot of the big commercial publisher journals that might be kind of big name journals some might think of. They do sometimes charge fees up to $5,000 to publish open access. I will also add that in the directory of open access journals, there are about 60%, 50% of journals perhaps that do not charge APCs at all. So that's just something to note. Similarly, the author retains copyright, usually using a Creative Commons license. And then the knowledge and the research is open to the world as long as anyone has an internet connection. This is just kind of an introduction to the publication cycle for some, but it's also a really useful tool in helping us and others understand how many times the university pays for access or pays for research. So this is the cycle from creation all the way to reuse. And what open access also allows is access to research throughout different stages of the publication cycle, which would not be perhaps normal within a subscription model. So why do I care about open access and why should you, especially at a biomedical campus, research should be available for patient groups, other researchers, for cures, for novel insights, and for taxpayers who are funding, for example, NIH research that then made publicly available so they're getting return on investment. There's also direct benefits to researchers that often are not shared but are great. So first is the ability to share science widely, to collaborate. Scientific collaboration is really big, multi-disciplinary, interdisciplinary, etc. And then there's also some evidence of a citation advantage for research that is open access. I guess that kind of goes back to people like to cite and read what they can actually read full text and don't have to kind of date to find. I also found an interesting take from a medical student's perspective, which is pretty relevant here on this campus. So the student, while he was studying to become a doctor, said that really he needs open access for his own education. Even at his own medical school, the institution was not able to subscribe to everything that he needed for his research. To be the best at providing care to patients, he also needed access to that research and wanted patients to be able to have access to that research. There is some evidence that open access to research leads to quicker innovation. When research is hidden behind embargoes for up to 24 months, for example, which can happen in some cases in a subscription context, then that research is not out there for others to be able to build on and innovate. Again, with patient care, there's also patients' rights. A lot of patients become experts in their own diagnosis and it would be excellent if they're able to get access to understand what's going on with those that they love or themselves. And then there's global health equity, which is obviously big here at Hopkins as well, being able to have access in different countries, being able to have different countries that might not have or different institutions even within the United States that don't have the same amount of money to be able to throw towards subscription costs. They have the same access in an open access landscape. And then finally, we talked about return on investment for the public. There are also several misconceptions that I'd like to address when it comes to open access, some that I hear over and over again. And first is that open access journals are of lesser quality than subscription journals. This is not always the case. This is not the case in every discipline. And as early as 2014, there was information about open access journals being at or near the top of every discipline in the sciences. The second is that open access is too expensive. And this goes back to the idea of APCs or article processing charges. And I will be addressing the different kinds of open access that can help make others aware of the costs involved and where you might not need to pay at all to make your research open access. And then finally, I will get scooped if I make my research article or data openly available. And I'll say that this can happen. This can happen whether or not your research is open access. But when you do post or publish research in an open access repository and a pre-print repository, much of the time that is a digital footprint that you have. Pre-print repositories, for example, have identifiers and DOIs. So you basically have asserted your copyright over that information and anybody that would steal it is breaking the law. So going back to open access models explained, then this is going to help address some of the cost issues and also the key terminology. So green open access means research is deposited in a repository. And this includes subject repositories, institutional repositories, pre-print repositories like archive, bio-archive, med-archive. And this is also free to do for the most part. Here at Hopkins, we have J Scholarship. You can deposit a copy of your peer-reviewed research there and it absolutely has no cost to you. And this is a really great way to disseminate research. It's also often allowed by journals that are subscription journals. So you don't have to pay an article processing charge, but you're, unfortunately, your research may be behind a paywall. You can often still post a version of your research in an open access repository. There's then gold open access. This is often referred to as journal open access. So journals that are open access or an article being published in a journal. An article being open access in a journal that is subscription. And this second definition is more what we like to call hybrid in the library world. And hybrid means that your one researcher article is published in an open access subscription journal. And as an aside, I'll add that libraries, a lot of libraries, tend to dislike this because it kind of means that publishers are sometimes double-dipping and they come with high costs. So double-dipping in that many grants, institutions, departments, libraries often help fund article processing charges. And then we have to then go back and subscribe to that main journal that has the rest of the subscription or paywall. And where can you see this at play? This is an example of a page for an author guideline page where a lot of times within journal policy, some of this information might be kind of buried in. But you're going to see within this short description, there are three types or three models going on here with publication. So there's green. So if you choose to publish subscription, then you have the option to post the accepted manuscript in your institution's repository after an embargo period. And that's where they have green open access. Or they mentioned gold open access. And again, when a publisher is describing gold open access, look to see whether or not they really mean hybrid. And what you might want to know as an author is whether or not that comes with a higher fee. If you happen to kind of have a, you don't like the fact that they are double dipping, for example, that's also something to know. But really it might come down to whether or not you can afford to pay a $5,000, for example, for hybrid open access. So this is an example of one of those journals where it might say gold, but really mean hybrid. When you really have no idea or this becomes too much information for you to be able to find, I like to show this research resource Sherpa Romeo. It can help you understand your rights to archive different versions of your research. So instead of kind of digging through some journal pages, you can simply search the journal in this database and it'll come up with what you can do with it. So it'll tell you things like you can archive a preprint, you can archive your publisher's PDF or you can't archive your publisher's PDF. It'll tell you whether or not, let's say you're funded by Welcome Trust, HHMI or NIH. It'll tell you whether or not the journal will post a version of that research into PubMed Central, for example, on your behalf. Which is really a really good thing to know because you may be required to do that as part of the grant, for example. It'll also tell you whether or not you can post a version of your research on a personal website. So there's a lot of benefits to using this resource other than just understanding what version you're allowed to post and whether you can post them. There's other Sherpa services that I highly recommend. I've talked about Romeo and Juliet is where you can understand some research funders archiving mandates and guidelines. If you look up the Gates Foundation, it will tell you or it will describe their data policy, their data sharing policy. So often I'm asked about sharing research. I'm asked about whether I can post in academia.edu or research gate. What are the different versions? So we're going to unpack this a little bit. So have you ever shared your research online or wanted to share research on a website, but we're unsure if you could. Often I'm asked about archiving research in an open repository like PubMed Central or Archive. We're sharing a version of research online that was not the publisher's PDF and what are these different versions? And then finally again, I'm asked about research gate and academia.edu. So first I'll start with the differences between the versions of research articles. And so a preprint is a term that I've thrown around a lot. And the preprint is the version of a research article that precedes formal peer review. It's sometimes made available before publication in a journal in repositories that are preprint repositories like archive, bio-archive, etc. Sometimes this is required by funders, not many, but it may become an increasing practice in the future. Sometimes journals require you to take down your preprint upon publication or link to that final publisher's PDF. And then a postprint is a version that is peer reviewed and precedes publication. It's also often called an author's accepted manuscript. And you can find a lot of these in PubMed Central. This should be a very similar version to the version of record or the publisher's PDF. The difference might just be in the copy editing and formatting and page numbers. You can see some information here about research gate and academia.edu. For example, American Chemical Society and Elsevier have sued the academic networking site research gate. I'm often asked about this again. I fully support sharing legally in whatever means you can. But often I'm finding researchers might not know their rights to share and what version they are allowed to share. So it's really important to, again, use Sherpa Romeo and understand your different kinds of different versions related to your research and your manuscript. Now on to preprinting. So preprinting is something that is unexpectedly quite controversial. I've had the experience of something in that it's a way that journals will not want to publish your research if you post in a preprint repository. And for others, for example, physics, this is a practice. This is a discipline where preprinting is just part of the process. And this is something that archive, for example, has been around since the early 90s. So this for some precedes the open access movement has become more famous. But these are a list of journals that accept preprints, just a few. There are many, many, many others that accept preprints as well. There are a few that don't. Just to note something that you need to check where you might be able to check that. It's again, Sherpa Romeo, but understanding also reading the journal policies and prior publication section. That's where you might want to note whether or not you can whether or not preprinting is seen as prior publication. So why post a preprint? We hosted a preprint panel here at Hopkins, and it was it was really interesting and check out the Welch Medical Library homepage if you'd like to read more information about that. But post a preprint because research can be disseminated immediately without embargoes. And we've talked about how embargoes can impact innovation rates. Reviewers want to read your work, not see the term in progress at our preprint panel. One of our panelists does a lot of NIH grant review, and she basically said, I don't want to see the term in progress in press or draft anymore. I want to read the work. I want to see your preprint and what you've been working on. And then finally, another panelist talked about how it has expanded his readership. His research got posted in an archive of preprint archive. It got picked up on social media. It got solicited by editors and by a journal saying, please, we want you to publish with us. So there are a lot of great benefits both kind of to the world and to the individual researcher for posting a preprint. And now we're going to move on to open license. The Creative Commons licenses and open licensing are sort of a thread that ties all of the term open terms together. And while this class is about open access publishing, you may also be familiar with the terms open science, open data, open source. And a lot of what some might not know about the threat that ties them together is really that licensing aspect. And where you might see this in the open access publishing world is with the licenses that journals might carry. This is an example. The journal medicine has is an open access journal and it has a CCBY and CND license that is one charge and a CCBY license that you can choose. That's another charge. Something to note is that Creative Commons licenses, if you ever want to adopt them on your own work, they are free. So I don't really know why the journal charges different prices for different Creative Commons licenses, but it is something to note in the open access publishing journal publishing landscape. So again, this is the license kind of page blown up. And these are the different different Creative Commons licenses. And as the video described where all rights reserved is sort of at the bottom as the least open on this prospect on this spectrum, there's the public domain or most open up at the top and Creative Commons falls all the way in the middle. And what you're seeing here is a CCBY license, which means that it's a Creative Commons license with attribution requirements. And that means that anybody who would reference your research would need to give you credit for it. And it goes all the way down to CCBY and CND. And what that means is that it's a Creative Commons license. Attribution is required. Anyone that's using your research cannot use it for commercial purposes. The NC means non-commercial and ND means no derivatives. It can't be changed. It can't no translations could be can be made, et cetera. And all the way in the middle, you'll see things that you may be familiar with. I feel familiar with the open source or copy left movement, for example, the CCBY essay, the essay means share like sort of like the pass it on license. If you have used this license and you come across it, it means that you can use whatever you find. You just need to give credit and share it with the same exact license that the initial object or research is requiring. So moving on to some publishing trends, what's going on right now? And I realize this could become very outdated soon. But first I'll talk about the University of California system. This has made the news because they've canceled their Elsevier subscriptions or their ScienceDirect journal subscriptions. And what many might not know, they may have heard that this happened, but they might not know that really what the University of California system was trying to get at was immediate open access to their researchers research without. As of now, they are still unable to come to an agreement and there has been no negotiation and they have lost access to their moving forward Elsevier journal subscriptions. There's also an ambitious initiative from Coalition S called Plan S. And this also asks for no embargo, open access with Creative Commons licenses. And this is run out from Coalition S, which is a coalition of the funders within 12 European countries. The Welcome Trust and Gates Foundation has signed on to Plan S. There's also information about predatory publishing that is out there in the term predatory publishing, which I think is quite controversial. It's often been associated with countries, lower middle income journals from lower middle income countries, which is not exactly fair, new and innovative journals. So there is just as another aside, there is a little bit of controversy with using the term predatory publishing or just kind of the way that it's been thrown around. But I will say that the New York Times did pick up information about one publisher in particular and predatory practices that they found in this includes poor peer review, solicitation from research, soliciting researchers for publications, deceptive practices in, in hosting conferences, etc. And they were sued, investigated by the FTC and sued for $50 million. Here at Hopkins, we've got a lot of our own advocates. Dr. Kessa DeVall often writes about reproducibility and rigor through transparency and openness and research. One of our previous Nobel Prize winners talks about the importance of pre-print repositories and sharing results as pre-prints. And then Steven Salzberg talked about a highly profitable medical journal and society publisher talking about open access and sort of the need to change business models that rely on high profit. And here at Hopkins, we also have a new open access policy as of 2018. So all faculty that are full time at Hopkins must make a version of their research open peer reviewed journal research openly available. And this includes pre-print posting or posting an author accepted manuscript or publishing in an open access journal. So finally, I have some author resources that could be helpful. And I'll say that there's no one tool that can help you with journal selection. This is when it relates to where you might want to publish whether open access or not. But there are lots of tools. So there's lots of categories when you think of tools. So there's publisher journal finder, there's databases that list journals, and then there's many websites as well. We're just going to focus on a few here. So the DLAJ I mentioned when talking about the article processing charges and where about 50 to 60 percent of journals do not carry article processing charges. DLAJ is a directory of or a list of open access journals in a list when you search for journals, not all will be listed in here. Many have not applied or I'll just note that the DLAJ has journals that have applied and basically said we do we conduct rigorous peer review and they've been reviewed and they are entered into this directory. So it is something to note, it's a good place to start when you're assessing the quality of the journal, for example. But again, note that not all journals are going to be listed in DLAJ and it does not necessarily mean that they're poor quality. But a benefit is that DLAJ journals records will list what the article processing charges are. There's also the NLM catalog and then a medline journal selection tool so you can check here to see whether or not certain biomedical journals, for example, are listed in medline and that's a really great place to also assess quality. Again, noting that it takes some time to get listed in medline. Here's some miscellaneous sites that can help you as you're navigating the publishing landscape. Again, when you're assessing the quality of journals or the quality of conferences or you get some solicitation emails from journals saying we really want you to come publish with us, use think checks submit. It's a pretty progressive resource that helps you walk through the process of understanding your own research and figuring out who you might want to reach and where to publish to do that. Cope, ICM, J.E. and OASPA are really, are organizations that a lot of journals or publishers, for example, are members of Cope and OASPA, basically stating that they follow ethical guidelines for publishing and peer review. When you come across a journal that you're investigating and it says that it is listed as a member of OASPA or Cope, for example, you should go and check those two pages to make sure that it actually is not just that the journal is saying that it is. We also have Jane and this is the last resource I mentioned on this page. Jane is a really great resource for perhaps if you have no idea where you might want to publish, you can paste a full abstract or just some keywords in your title into this resource, Jane, journal author name estimator, and it will search through medline indexed journals and return journals and return similar matched journals that might carry similar topics, keywords, et cetera. So it's a really good place where I think many might start to see where they might want to publish their research. And again, if you're interested in more about think checks submit, I have a video posted here that you're welcome to click on anytime and watch. Welch Library also has many resources that can help. Welch Library Research metrics guide has information about telling your impact story as a researcher and we also teach a class, one of our information is teaches a class about that as well. The writing and publishing guide has a lot of these links that I have already mentioned. And then if anyone is curious about whether or not the library or the institution has any partnerships or help with fees associated with publication we do have some partnerships with publishers that will help you get a discount on any fees. Orchid is an independent non-profit effort to provide an open registry of unique researcher identifiers. And this is really important to note for anyone that might have an NIH T32 grant, early career grant, this is something to note that you are now required to have an orchid by the NIH. But it has a lot of benefits in general including the ability to tie all of your research articles together and all of the research output not just articles, conference presentations, posters, etc. together in one space. It is not necessarily a profile, it is a social security number as a researcher. And Hopkins does have a partnership with orchid where if you use the second link below it will automatically verify with your friends that you are here. And then it will kind of go an extra step for you and take some work out of that. If you have any questions about orchid please contact the Welch Medical Library. And finally just two miscellaneous resources that are very, I think some of the best resources that we have out there in the open access world unpayable and open access button both allow you to get access to open versions of research articles when you're using things like Google. You come upon a publisher page. Perhaps you have graduated from Hopkins or wherever you are at your institution or you go somewhere else where you don't have the same access as you might at Hopkins. Then you can get these two Chrome or browser extensions and this will link you directly to an open version of an article. So again if you're on a publisher's webpage or you're on Google Scholar you might see a little green lock or an orange open access button pop up that will indicate there is an open version and you might not know this unless you have the browser extension you might just think you don't have access. So these are very important resources that I fully suggest that you check out. And with that that's all that I have for the open access publishing Welch class. Please contact me if you have any questions and thank you for attending.