Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Feb 18;332(7538):394-6.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.38705.490961.55. Epub 2006 Jan 9.

Importance of free access to research articles on decision to submit to the BMJ: survey of authors

Sara Schroter  1
Affiliations

Importance of free access to research articles on decision to submit to the BMJ: survey of authors

Sara Schroter. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether free access to research articles on bmj.com is an important factor in authors' decisions on whether to submit to the BMJ, whether the introduction of access controls to part of the BMJ's content has influenced authors' perceptions of the journal, and whether the introduction of further access controls would influence authors' perceptions.

Design: Cross sectional electronic survey.

Participants: Authors of research articles published in the BMJ.

Results: 211/415 (51%) eligible authors responded. Three quarters (159/211) said the fact that all readers would have free access to their paper on bmj.com was very important or important to their decision to submit to the BMJ. Over half (111/211) said closure of free access to research articles would make them slightly less likely to submit research articles to the BMJ in the future, 14% (29/211) said they would be much less likely to submit, and 34% (71/211) said it would not influence their decision. Authors were equally divided in their opinion as to whether the closure of access to parts of the journal since January 2005 had affected their view of the BMJ; 40% (84/211) said it had, 38% (80/211) said it had not. In contrast, 67% (141/211) said their view of the BMJ would change if it closed access to research articles. Authors' comments largely focused on disappointment with such a regressive step in the era of open access publishing, loss of a distinctive feature of the BMJ, a perceived reduction in the journal's usefulness as a resource and global influence, restricted readership, less attractive to publish in, and the negative impact on the journal's image.

Conclusions: Authors value free access to research articles and consider this an important factor in deciding whether to submit to the BMJ. Closing access to research articles would have a negative effect on authors' perceptions of the journal and their likeliness to submit.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hopkins C. Healthy warning: this journal supports full text, tariff-free archives. Nature webdebates 2001. www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-access/Articles/hopkins.html (accessed 7 July 2004).
    1. Eisen M, Brown P. Should the scientific literature be privately owned and controlled? Nature webdebates 2001. www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-access/Articles/Eisen.htm (accessed 7 July 2004.)
    1. Godlee F. Open access, and proud of it. BMJ 2005; 330. (2 April.) - PubMed
    1. Delamothe T, Smith R. Paying for bmj.com. BMJ 2003;327:241-2.
    1. Asch DA, Jedrziewski AK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50: 1129-36. - PubMed

Publication types