Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation
BackgroundSome scholars who are skeptical about open-access mega journals (OAMJs) have argued that low-quality papers are often difficult to publish in more prestigious and authoritative journals, and OAMJs may be their main destination. ObjectiveThis study aims t...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
JMIR Publications
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Medical Internet Research |
| Online Access: | https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e59598 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841533459172950016 |
|---|---|
| author | Yuyan Jiang Xue-li Liu Liyun Wang |
| author_facet | Yuyan Jiang Xue-li Liu Liyun Wang |
| author_sort | Yuyan Jiang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
BackgroundSome scholars who are skeptical about open-access mega journals (OAMJs) have argued that low-quality papers are often difficult to publish in more prestigious and authoritative journals, and OAMJs may be their main destination.
ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the academic quality of OAMJs and highlight their important role in clinical medicine. To achieve this aim, authoritative journals and representative OAMJs in this field were selected as research objects. The differences between the two were compared and analyzed in terms of their level of disruptive innovation. Additionally, this paper explored the countries and research directions for which OAMJs serve as publication channels for disruptive innovations.
MethodsIn this study, the journal information, literature data, and open citation relationship data were sourced from Journal Citation Reports (JCR), Web of Science (WoS), InCites, and the OpenCitations Index of PubMed Open PMID-to-PMID citations (POCI). Then, we calculated the disruptive innovation level of the focus paper based on the local POCI database.
ResultsThe mean Journal Disruption Index (JDI) values for the selected authoritative journals and OAMJs were 0.5866 (SD 0.26933) and 0.0255 (SD 0.01689), respectively, showing a significant difference. Only 1.48% (861/58,181) of the OAMJ papers reached the median level of disruptive innovation of authoritative journal papers (MDAJ). However, the absolute number was roughly equal to that of authoritative journals. OAMJs surpassed authoritative journals in publishing innovative papers in 24 research directions (eg, Allergy), accounting for 40.68% of all research directions in clinical medicine. Among research topics with at least 10 authoritative papers, OAMJs matched or exceeded MDAJ in 35.71% of cases. The number of papers published in authoritative journals and the average level of disruptive innovation in each country showed a linear relationship after logarithmic treatment, with a correlation coefficient of –0.891 (P<.001). However, the number of papers published in OAMJs in each country and the average level of disruptive innovation did not show a linear relationship after logarithmic treatment.
ConclusionsWhile the average disruptive innovation level of papers published by OAMJs is significantly lower than that of authoritative journals, OAMJs have become an important publication channel for innovative research in various research directions. They also provide fairer opportunities for the publication of innovative results from limited-income countries. Therefore, the academic community should recognize the contribution and value of OAMJs to advancing scientific research. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-029f79045f044fff8ce226284ae82abf |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1438-8871 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | JMIR Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Medical Internet Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-029f79045f044fff8ce226284ae82abf2025-01-15T21:31:51ZengJMIR PublicationsJournal of Medical Internet Research1438-88712025-01-0127e5959810.2196/59598Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation EvaluationYuyan Jianghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8353-5179Xue-li Liuhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7055-674XLiyun Wanghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2629-5690 BackgroundSome scholars who are skeptical about open-access mega journals (OAMJs) have argued that low-quality papers are often difficult to publish in more prestigious and authoritative journals, and OAMJs may be their main destination. ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the academic quality of OAMJs and highlight their important role in clinical medicine. To achieve this aim, authoritative journals and representative OAMJs in this field were selected as research objects. The differences between the two were compared and analyzed in terms of their level of disruptive innovation. Additionally, this paper explored the countries and research directions for which OAMJs serve as publication channels for disruptive innovations. MethodsIn this study, the journal information, literature data, and open citation relationship data were sourced from Journal Citation Reports (JCR), Web of Science (WoS), InCites, and the OpenCitations Index of PubMed Open PMID-to-PMID citations (POCI). Then, we calculated the disruptive innovation level of the focus paper based on the local POCI database. ResultsThe mean Journal Disruption Index (JDI) values for the selected authoritative journals and OAMJs were 0.5866 (SD 0.26933) and 0.0255 (SD 0.01689), respectively, showing a significant difference. Only 1.48% (861/58,181) of the OAMJ papers reached the median level of disruptive innovation of authoritative journal papers (MDAJ). However, the absolute number was roughly equal to that of authoritative journals. OAMJs surpassed authoritative journals in publishing innovative papers in 24 research directions (eg, Allergy), accounting for 40.68% of all research directions in clinical medicine. Among research topics with at least 10 authoritative papers, OAMJs matched or exceeded MDAJ in 35.71% of cases. The number of papers published in authoritative journals and the average level of disruptive innovation in each country showed a linear relationship after logarithmic treatment, with a correlation coefficient of –0.891 (P<.001). However, the number of papers published in OAMJs in each country and the average level of disruptive innovation did not show a linear relationship after logarithmic treatment. ConclusionsWhile the average disruptive innovation level of papers published by OAMJs is significantly lower than that of authoritative journals, OAMJs have become an important publication channel for innovative research in various research directions. They also provide fairer opportunities for the publication of innovative results from limited-income countries. Therefore, the academic community should recognize the contribution and value of OAMJs to advancing scientific research.https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e59598 |
| spellingShingle | Yuyan Jiang Xue-li Liu Liyun Wang Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation Journal of Medical Internet Research |
| title | Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation |
| title_full | Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation |
| title_short | Evaluation and Comparison of the Academic Quality of Open-Access Mega Journals and Authoritative Journals: Disruptive Innovation Evaluation |
| title_sort | evaluation and comparison of the academic quality of open access mega journals and authoritative journals disruptive innovation evaluation |
| url | https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e59598 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yuyanjiang evaluationandcomparisonoftheacademicqualityofopenaccessmegajournalsandauthoritativejournalsdisruptiveinnovationevaluation AT xueliliu evaluationandcomparisonoftheacademicqualityofopenaccessmegajournalsandauthoritativejournalsdisruptiveinnovationevaluation AT liyunwang evaluationandcomparisonoftheacademicqualityofopenaccessmegajournalsandauthoritativejournalsdisruptiveinnovationevaluation |