Accessibility of published research to practicing veterinarians

Jessica R. Page

Abstract


Objectives: This study established the percentage of veterinary research articles that are freely available online, availability differences inside and outside of core veterinary medicine publications, sources and trends in article availability over time, and author archiving policies of veterinary journals. This research is particularly important for unaffiliated practitioners who lack broad subscription access and the librarians who assist them.

Methods: Web of Science citation data were collected for articles published from 2000–2014 by authors from twenty-eight accredited US colleges of veterinary medicine. A sample of these articles was searched by title in Google Scholar to determine which were freely available online and their sources. Journals represented in this dataset and a basic list of veterinary serials were cross-referenced with the Sherpa/RoMEO database to determine author archiving policies and the percentage of articles that could potentially be made freely available.

Results: Over half (62%) of the sample articles were freely available online, most of which (57%) were available from publishers’ websites. Articles published more recently were more likely to be freely available. More articles were found to be available in 2017 (62%) than in 2015 (57%). Most (62%) of the included journals had policies allowing authors to archive copies of their articles.

Conclusions: Many articles are freely available online, but opportunity exists to archive additional articles while complying with existing copyright agreements. Articles in veterinary medicine–specific journals are less likely to be freely available than those in interdisciplinary journals. Requirements for federally funded research have likely influenced article availability and may continue to do so.

Keywords


Veterinary Medicine; Open Access Publishing; Access to Information; Evidence-Based Practice; Education, Veterinary; Information Storage and Retrieval

Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


American Veterinary Medical Association. Market research statistics: U.S. veterinarians 2016 [Internet]. The Association [cited 9 Feb 2017]. .

Pelzer NL, Leysen JM. Use of information resources by veterinary practitioners. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991 Jan;79(1):10–6.

Wales T. Practice makes perfect? vets’ information seeking behaviour and information use explored. Aslib Proc. 2000;52(7):235–46.

Larson RL. Access to scientific literature in rural veterinary practice. Online J Rural Res Policy. 2010;5(7). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4148/ojrrp.v5i7.262.

Huntley SJ, Dean RS, Massey A, Brennan ML. International evidence-based medicine survey of the veterinary profession: information sources used by veterinarians. PLOS ONE. 2016 Jul 26;11(7):e0159732.

University of Nottingham. Evidence-based veterinary medicine (EVM) [Internet]. The University [cited 14 Sep 2016]. .

Dinkelman AL, Viera AR, Bickett-Weddle DA. The role of veterinary medical librarians in teaching information literacy. J Vet Med Educ. 2011 Summer;38(2):141–9.

Shurtz S, Fajt V, Heyns EP, Norton HF, Weingart S. Teaching evidence-based veterinary medicine in the US and Canada. J Vet Med Educ. 2017 Winter;44(4):660–8.

American Veterinary Medical Association. Council on Education (COE) accreditation policies and procedures: requirements [Internet]. The Association; Sep 2017 [cited 25 Jul 2016]. .

Vandeweerd JM, Kirschvink N, Clegg P, Vandenput S, Gustin P, Saegerman C. Is evidence-based medicine so evident in veterinary research and practice? history, obstacles and perspectives. Vet J. 2012 Jan;191(1):28–34.

Christopher MM, Young KM. Awareness of “predatory” open-access journals among prospective veterinary and medical authors attending scientific writing workshops. Front Vet Sci. 2015;(2):22.

Suber P. Open access overview [Internet]. 5 Dec 2015 [cited 25 Jul 2016]. .

Nault AJ. Open access of publications by veterinary faculty in the United States and Canada. J Vet Med Educ. 2011 Spring;38(1):33–41.

Vreeland CE, Alpi KM, Pike CA, Whitman EE, Kennedy-Stoskopf S. Access to human, animal, and environmental journals is still limited for the One Health community. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Apr;104(2):100–8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.003.

Definitions and terms [Internet]. SHERPA/RoMEO [cited 10 May 2016]. .

Application programmers’ interface [Internet]. SHERPA/RoMEO; 25 Nov 2013 [cited 10 May 2016]. .

Ugaz AG, Boyd CT, Croft VF, Carrigan EE, Anderson KM. Basic list of veterinary medical serials, third edition: using a decision matrix to update the core list of veterinary journals. J Med Libr Assoc. 2010 Oct;98(4):282–92. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.98.4.004.

Page JR, Moberly HK, Youngen GK, Hamel BJ. Exploring the veterinary literature: a bibliometric methodology for identifying interdisciplinary and collaborative publications. Coll Res Libr. 2014;75(5):664–83.

Inclusion guidelines for webmasters [Internet]. Google Scholar [cited 21 Feb 2017]. .

National Institutes of Health. NIH public access policy details [Internet]. The Institutes; 25 Mar 2016 [cited 24 Jan 2017]. .

Matthews S. NIH will withhold grant money to enforce public-access policy. Nat Med. 2013 Jan;19(1):3.

Stebbins M. Expanding access to the results of federally funded scientific research [Internet]. The White House; 22 Feb 2013 [cited 21 Feb 2017]. .

United States Department of Agriculture. Implementation plan to increase public access to results of USDA-funded scientific research [Internet]. The Department; 7 Nov 2014 [cited 10 Feb 2017].

National Science Foundation. Public access plan: today’s data, tomorrow’s discoveries: increasing access to the results of research funded by the National Science Foundation [Internet]. The Foundation; 18 Mar 2015 [cited 10 Feb 2017]. .

Greshake B. The SciHub data part 2: academic pirates [Internet]. 23 May 2016 [cited 8 Jul 2016]. .

Gardner C, Gardner G. Bypassing interlibrary loan via Twitter: an exploration of# icanhazpdf requests [Internet]. Presented at: American College of Research Libraries Conference; Portland, OR; 25–28 May 2015 [cited 10 Aug 2016].

Gardner CC, Gardner GJ. Fast and furious (at publishers): the motivations behind crowdsourced research sharing. Coll Res Libr. 2017 Feb;78(2):131–49.

American Society for Microbiology. Frequently asked questions about institutional subscriptions [Internet]. The Society [cited 26 Jan 2017]. .

Subscriptions FAQ [Internet]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [cited 26 Jan 2017]. .

AAAS and Gates Foundation partnership announcement [Internet]. Science [cited 22 Feb 2017]. .

Electrochemical Society. A new model for scientific publishing [Internet]. The Society [cited 21 Feb 2017]. .

Unpaywall [Internet]. [cited 20 Dec 2017]. .




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.196

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Jessica R. Page

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.