Characteristics of retracted open access biomedical literature: A bibliographic analysis - Peterson - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology - Wiley Online Library 2014-01-03


Use the link to access pay-per-view options for the article published in JASIS&T available from Wiley.  The abstract reads as follows: "The author analyzes retracted biomedical literature to determine if open access and fee-for-access works differ in terms of the practice and effectiveness of retraction. Citation and content analysis were applied to articles grouped by accessibility (libre, gratis, and fee for access) for various bibliometric attributes. Open access literature does not differ from fee-for-access literature in terms of impact factor, detection of error, or change in postretraction citation rates. Literature found in the PubMed Central Open Access subset provides detailed information about the nature of the anomaly more often than less accessible works. Open access literature appears to be of similar reliability and integrity as the population of biomedical literature in general, with the added value of being more forthcoming about the nature of errors when they are identified."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) ┬╗

Tags: oa.lis oa.libraries oa.quality oa.libre oa.librarians oa.wiley oa.jif oa.citations oa.biomedicine oa.retractions oa.credibility oa.pmc oa.asis&t oa.paywalled oa.metrics oa.studies oa.empirical

Date tagged:

01/03/2014, 10:24

Date published:

01/03/2014, 05:24