Business and publication models of radiology journals.

Arvind Vijayasarathi, Jeffrey Ding, Richard Duszak, Faisal Khosa
Author Information
  1. Arvind Vijayasarathi: Department of Radiology, University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, United States of America. Electronic address: Arvind.Vijayasarathi@gmail.com.
  2. Jeffrey Ding: Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Canada.
  3. Richard Duszak: Department of Radiology and Imaging Services, Emory University School of Medicine, United States of America.
  4. Faisal Khosa: Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia/Vancouver General Hospital, Canada.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Traditional and open-access publication models have been increasingly scrutinized, particularly in light of the recent impasse regarding cost and access between Elsevier and the University of California. Peer-reviewed publications are the main source through which science is disseminated, yet the industry remains an enigma to most. Our aim was to determine radiology publisher market-share, access type, geographic distribution and relative research impact in order to better understand the traditionally opaque realm of academic publishing.
METHODS: During April 2020, Scopus was queried to extract all entries in the "Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging" subcategory of "Medicine." Journal name, publisher, SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) score, country and publication model were cataloged. Publishers were grouped by their ownership type and journals were grouped by their publication model. Overall trends were assessed across publisher type, publication model, and geographic location.
RESULTS: Commercial publishers are used by 82% (239 of 293) of radiology journals. Elsevier and Springer Nature together published 40% (118/293) of journal titles within the category. Approximately one fourth (77/293) of radiology journals were open-access. On average, SJRs were highest for journals published commercially. Mean SJR across the top 10 publishers and publication model were similar (p = 0.06 and p = 0.48, respectively).
DISCUSSION: Radiology journal publication is heavily consolidated amongst a few global commercial organizations. Most radiology journals were subscription-based, but their impact did not differ significantly from open-access counterparts. Further disputes between universities and publishers could influence future manuscript submission, review, and citation, which has the potential to destabilize traditional publication models.

Keywords

MeSH Term

Bibliometrics
Humans
Peer Review
Periodicals as Topic
Radiography
Radiology

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0publicationjournalsradiologymodelpublishersopen-accessmodelsaccesspublishertypeJournalElseviergeographicimpactSJRgroupedacrosspublishedjournalp = 0OBJECTIVE:TraditionalincreasinglyscrutinizedparticularlylightrecentimpasseregardingcostUniversityCaliforniaPeer-reviewedpublicationsmainsourcesciencedisseminatedyetindustryremainsenigmaaimdeterminemarket-sharedistributionrelativeresearchorderbetterunderstandtraditionallyopaquerealmacademicpublishingMETHODS:April2020Scopusqueriedextractentries"RadiologyNuclearMedicineImaging"subcategory"Medicine"nameSCImagoRankingscorecountrycatalogedPublishersownershipOveralltrendsassessedlocationRESULTS:Commercialused82%239293SpringerNaturetogether40%118/293titleswithincategoryApproximatelyonefourth77/293averageSJRshighestcommerciallyMeantop10similar0648respectivelyDISCUSSION:Radiologyheavilyconsolidatedamongstglobalcommercialorganizationssubscription-baseddiffersignificantlycounterpartsdisputesuniversitiesinfluencefuturemanuscriptsubmissionreviewcitationpotentialdestabilizetraditionalBusinessOpenPublication

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.