1. Open Access in
Medicine - Overview
Martin Fenner
Klinik für Hämatologie,
Hämostaseologie, Onkologie und
Stammzelltransplantation

2. Open Access
The author(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable
right of access to, and a license to copy, use and
distribute the work publicly and to make and
distribute derivative works, subject to proper
attribution of authorship.
A complete version of the work and all supplemental
materials is deposited (and thus published) in at
least one online repository.
Berlin Declaration on Open Access 2003

3. „Allianz der Deutschen
WIssenschaftsorganisationen“
signed the Berlin Declaration
27
29
ektorenkonferenz (HRK)
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG)
28
Leibniz-Gemeinschaft
30
H#"$7#2$S0-#'46*5$D@*$()#*$+,,#--$
.#5'$7"#$!12$52@T#*$U#2'$&61$7"#$H#&,%9 26
Wissenschaftsrat !"#$ %&'&())*+,(%&$ -).$ */&01(&%&).$
'6*5$ 7#2$ 7"D#2-#*$ O&%0#*8#7"*56*5#*$ H(&$ A4)A0&+&$ P'#&+,-)%$ 1(0.$ ()2
2 )&067"/$ .&0$ !%*$ S40$ 7""&'$ 7)$ .&)$ !"#$
132$7"#$#"*4#.*#*$N@,%-,%6.#*:$!"#-$5".'$
24 Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft
,(&0+&$ 340#56-)%#40%7)(#7+(4)$ 804.-2 %&"'()$:',/5/8/+'01!%:,2$%&"&(#+&+>$E(+$.&0$
"*$8#-@*7#2#2$U#"-#$&6,%$132$7"#$6*'#29 !"#$ !"#$%#&'(")"#%*+,-./$ %&'$ (")%$ *+,$ P")%'"/#$ Q)
-,%"#7.",%#*$FQ,%#2V$ ,(&0+$ .(&$ !"#$%&"'()$*+,+&&,(-"./0 1!%*2$ ('$J760$KLLU$%&%0*).&+&)$!"#0%&"'()0;5$
-"#.$ /#(#'*'0$ 1#2$ 34#"#2$ 5+('&+()%$ 6+&7 )"#%*+,-./$ *+4$
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) +21$ ;#/+'&)%'#'#4$ <=47 4152617%8$ N&4#
'(+$(60&0$340#56-)%$&()$9::&)+"(56&#$;-+<$ 95/"&0<5=4"4>01!%;<2$67+$.(&$!%*$&0%I)2
."'8'(/#94:3'#4$ 25
.7#$ ('$ 9::&)+"(56&)$ =)+&0&##&$ %&)-+,+$ ,&).$&()&$,&)+07"&$=)#+(+-+(4)$%&#567::&)<$
„Bei der Förderung von Open Access müs-
!"#$%&'%($)%($*(#+,'+%(-%&./'%($)%($!"#$ ()%+2/(#4/#;2"((#$ "2$ 1"/"'&.#4$ <=4,$ ;#"'(A4#"(#($?9
1&0.&)$#4"">$?(&$#&+,+&$#(56$.&#67"/$#564)$ .&0&)$!-:%7/&)#8&A+0-'$.(&$390.&0-)%$
%&'"#( )#*%+#,'-( ./"#( 0"'( 122"'"'( 3,-4'-( Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft *+$ 3B41#42C$ !#4$ STTU$+21$1"#$V#
sen wir natürlich stets die verschiedenen Publi- >?9#2$ 5))#((@$ ('84A#4$
:0*6$:*0$.&)$@8&)2!55&##2;&.7)A&)$&()>
kationskulturen der wissenschaftlichen Fächer .&#$@8&)2!55&##2;&.7)A&)#$-).$.&##&)$
5,( 6&77"'78942:%&89";( <&77"'$ 01'$ 2334$ ()%2#..#$ +21$ 1"4#A'#$ -+/&2/$*'&+ 1"#(#4$ 5))#((7W#"'."2"#
!"#$%&'()'"*+ *'&+ ,-$$-."+ *+$ !"#$% ?-$$'"$()9>
=)+&0)$:40.&0+$#(&$()$(60&)$B&%&")$,-0$ 807A+(#56&$!)1&).-)%$&()#56"(&T+>$H40+$
berücksichtigen, aber wir sind sicher, dass grund-
,'+%(#+5+-+$ )%($ 6&##%'#./78+#(7+$ )&%$ D23=4,&'"=2$ E$ F#1#4*#"'0$ :;#4&..0$ 3:4$ +,/#(#'*'$N"41
&'#()%*"$"+,-.&/0(/+0'-#&12'+34&+56$4"2+ $()9>#='&+ *'&+
?(56&0-)%$%-+&0$1(##&)#567:+"(56&0$C072 (#+$7-56$.7#$?@+'0A((+,,0%B&5(>0C+"D$7)2
sätzlich alle Fächer profitieren können“,
9&%"%$ )%($ :;%'<!..%##<=%>%?,'?@$ A%($ 1#2$ G+'*#4$ *&1"2'"*'&+ 8&92'"+ :."+ ;'< $-"*+ 9=$+ D'&94$
2&.7'&+ 4"*+ A=('#2.=($ +21$ =%2#$ H&44"7
D(#$ (60&$ 1(##&)#567:+"(56&)$Q,"9,+' RSST' /#+,148$.#&#-#' &#+'!-:%7/&$ .(&$ F&07+-)%$
8#'@*'$ 7"#$ NO?9K2Q-"7#*'"*>$ K2@1#-9 ! A%' E(+70/&(+&0$ %&#(&.&"+<$ .&##&)$
$'==$()9>#/+?-$$'"$()9>#+4"*+?-&#$()9>#+ 2'L'&+
6&##%'#./78+#(7+$ B%1B7./+%+$ )&%$ *'+< C0(),(8#$ .&0$ G::&)+2 -).$ P)+&0#+*+,-)%$ .&0$ !%:,$ -).$ .(&$ :."+ B !
,-0$ F&756+-)%$ .&#$ G,9*-,9448$944'&#+'!)3'J.8$-?.".#"='%.-'
-@2$!2:$W&252#'$U"*'#20&*'#.:$ 2,-#""#-3#'
"#$%#"&' ())*#+,-./' 01#+'
+2'#4(':'*'$ "2'#42&'"=2&.#$ +21$ "2'#47 1"#$ ",$ ?9#2$ 5
"(56A&(+$ .&0$ ;0-)."7%&):40#56-)%$34+ ='-$#'"/+ )9#+ *9$+ @)'A9+ B%'"+ C(('$$+ 9I#-:+4"*+$%'-()
>&.C",'?%'$ &D$ :;%'$ !..%##$ E%")$ ,')$
4-,--5' 6)%.-' 4."&' 7)+48$#+' &,+,9:' ,";#! 7-:>$ V&0+0&+-)%$ .&0$ @8&)2!55&##2C4"(+(A$ .&0$
&#"#"'M+)N#(-"#$%#+'&#+'!)3',9:;#:)+!

4. Gold OA
Publishing in an Open Access journal
Green OA
Self-archiving in an institutional repository
or PubMed Central

5. PubMed comprises more than 19 million citations for
biomedical articles from MEDLINE and life science journals.
Citations may include links to full-text articles from
PubMed Central or publisher web sites.

6. Availability of fulltext articles
Matsubayashi et al.
in PubMed in 2005
Figure 1
Full text availability of sample articles (n54,667)
Matsubayashi M et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009 the 8 countries accounting for the
journal’s publishers (72.1%). PMC (26.0%) was the
ratios. Among
second most common method of access, followed by
largest number of articles in the sample, the rate at
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.002. which OA articles were published by authors residing
journal platforms or portal sites (17.4%).
In contrast, the percentage of OA articles available in Canada was the highest (37.6%), with the United

7. Distribution of PubMed Open Access
articles from Germany in 2005
Journal Website
PubMed Central
Institutional Repository
Author’s Website
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Matsubayashi M et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.002.

8. NIH Public Access Policy
Starting May 25, 2008, peer-reviewed
journal manuscripts that arise from NIH
funds have to be submitted to PubMed
Central upon acceptance for publication.
These papers have to be made accessible to
the public on PubMed Central no later than
12 months after publication.

9. Submissions to PubMed Central
NIH Public Access Policy
http://www.nihms.nih.gov/stats/index.shtml

10. Researcher Science Library Institution
Funding
Organisation
Journal
General Public Policy Makers Journalists

11. Researcher Reader
Reviewer
Author Editor

12. Reader

13. Gideon Burton: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wakingtiger/3157621376/

14. The 20 most popular journals in my reference
manager (about 1700 papers) include
1 Open Access journal:
PLoS Medicine
3 Journals without an institutional subscription:
Cell
Lancet Oncology
Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

15. atego-
orable
atients 100
-nega- 90
1 and
80
or out-
70
urvival Mutant CEBPA
ates of 60
ely. 50
Mutant NPM1
on the 40 without FLT3-ITD
e was 30
recent 20
D mu- Other genotypes
10 P<0.001
tcome
0
s with 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
, FLT3-
ciated
enetic Other genotypes 266 153 90 68 39 22 15 9 7 4 0
red in Mutant NPM1 without 150 123 101 75 56 38 25 14 10 4 2
FLT3-ITD
of pa- Mutant CEBPA 67 54 39 30 19 13 8 6 5 3 0
e were
nosti- Figure 2. Kaplan–Meier Survival Estimates, According to Genotype.
with- Schlenk R et al. NEJM 2008 doi:10.1056/NEJMra063728
Data are shown for relapse-free survival (Panel A) and overall survival
(Panel B). “Other genotypes” is defined as the FLT3-ITD genotype and the
FLT3- ICM
AUTHOR: Schlenk (Dohner) RETAKE 1st

16. Krege S et al. Eur Urol 2008 doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.12.024

18. Use Creative Commons Attribution License:

19. Share fulltext papers with other people
in your group

20. Duncan Hull: http://www.flickr.com/
photos/dullhunk/3249956703/

21. Author

22. Jorge Cham: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1200

23. Impact Factor
A = the number of times articles published in 2007 and
2008 were cited by indexed journals during 2009
B = the total number of "citable items" published in
2007 and 2008. ("Citable items" are usually articles,
reviews, proceedings, or notes; not editorials or Letters-
to-the-Editor.)
2009 impact factor = A/B
Calculated (and sold) by

24. http://ebling.library.wisc.edu/portals/impact-factor/

25. biological.
PLoS Computational Biology and PLoS
s are expected to cross this threshold in
ed self-sufficiency almost immediately
affordable price, and cost-effective
to Published Articles publishes research on bacteria, PLoS Genetics reflects Coverageand
PLoS Pathogens Operating Expense the full breadth PLoS ONE is an innovative, interactive journal
fungi, parasites, prions, and viruses that interdisciplinary nature of genetics and genomics that publishes peer-reviewed rigorous research
(% of operatingby publishing original contributions in
contributes to our understanding of the biology research expense covered by operating revenues) within science and medicine.
from all disciplines
of pathogens and pathogen-host interactions. all areas of biology.
%
100
submitted
90
published “ Working in conjunction with other advocacy groups, PLoS has been
80 part of a small, but influential, team that has changed public policy.
Today, the NIH requires everyone supported by an NIH grant to
70 make their results publicly available in PubMed Central within
one year of publication.”
60
– Dr. Harold E. Varmus, PLoS Co-founder, Chairman of the Board
50
9
40
PLoS Progress Report
30
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases is the first
20
OA journal devoted to publishing research on
PLoS ONE
all scientific, medical, and10
public health aspects
of the forgotten diseases affecting the world’s
forgotten people. 0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
PLoS Progress Report June 2009:
http://www.plos.org/downloads/progress_report.pdf

26. Hybrid Access
http://www.bloodjournal.org

27. as Molecular Systems Biology, are fully model, science needs to be open, and web
open access. researchers from less-developed countries take
So why not implement full open in particular should not be disadvantaged acce
access for all of our journals? Practical by being asked to pay beyond their means edit
considerations have an important
role. According to Journal Citation
editorial
for journal subscriptions. For that reason,
Nature Publishing Group is in partnership
them
thro
Reports ( omson Reuters), in 2007 we with a number of initiatives that provide
Science in the open
published 133 research papers (including free access to journal content to scientists Refe
review articles). Subscription-based from such countries6. 1. ww
2. htt
Advancedtowards open-access schemes gain momentum, the choice these, in‘author pays’ and
As moves Materials published 736 items, E orts like between addition to the 3. htt
and the open-access journal Optics Express
subscription-based models may come down to fundamental business considerations rather thanin
freedom that we grant to our authors limits 4. ww
published 1961 papers, with publication
in access to original research. making their research available in public 5. ww
fees starting from $925 per paper. From repositories a er a reasonable amount of 6. ww
e scienti c discourse is, by its very such statistics it is obvious that, assuming time, illustrate that the choice between
NATURE MATERIALS | VOL 8 | AUGUST 2009 | www.nature.com/naturematerials open access and a subscription-based
nature, open and democratic. Anyone can simple economics of scale, a switch to
participate, and, based on the principles of an author-pays model in our case would approach is more a matter of
deductive logic and experimental discovery, incur signi cant publication fees per having a sustainable business
anyone can contribute to the process. ere paper published. model, rather than that of
Papers published per year
is no place for censorship in science. As an
essay in the New York Times makes clear,
In addition, at every stage
of manuscript handling we
a fundamentally di erent
point of view. Sharing our
nmat_2497_AUG09.indd 611 good science, we
“If we are not practicing provide an expensive, high- entire publication costs
Readers per paper
probably aren’t practicing good democracy.
And vice versa”1.
quality service. is not only
involves the professional
among only 133 authors,
rather than thousands of
e natural consequence of this subediting and production of subscribing individuals
Expensive services (e.g. prescreening by professional editors,
openness in the practice of science is that
all aspects of science should be open and
accepted papers, but also an
exhaustive prescreening of
and institutions,
certainly does not
accessible to everyone. In that spirit, several submitted manuscripts. seem feasible.
subediting)
© ISTOCKPHOTO / PATRYK GALKA
universities, including Harvard2, MIT3 and At Nature Materials, we As for the open-
University College London4, have recently prescreen well above 80% access resolutions by
announced initiatives that aim to make the of submitted manuscripts universities such as
scienti c output of their researchers freely without peer review. is Harvard and MIT,
available in public repositories. means that, at a cost, we at present we do not
ese schemes are part of a more rely much less on the ‘free’ wish to accept any
doi:10.1038/nmat2497
general drive towards open access in
publishing, whereby authors, not readers,
peer-reviewing services
of scientists than journals
addenda to our author
licence, because, as

28. The process of submitting a manuscript
to a biomedical journal is time-consuming,
requires skills that most scientists are not
trained in, and is not standardized.
The submission of an accepted manuscript
to an institutional repository (green
OA) is additional work with many of the
same characteristics.

29. Publication charges (2009)
Nature Communications (starts 2010) 5.000 $
PLoS Medicine 2.900 $
EMBO Journal 2.795 $
Blood 2.000 $
BMC Cancer 1.690 $
PLoS ONE 1.200 $
BMJ 0$
Cancer Research (subscription access) charges $75 for
submission and $85 per page for accepted manuscripts

30. H Open Access vs. subscription access articles
during the first six months after publication
120 The negative b
Increase in downloads and visitors (%)
no c
that open access r
di itat
in
ffe io
80 5% (incident rate
re ns
0.81 to 1.10; P=0.
nc
expected citation
e
40
1.55; P=0.716), al
significantly differ
0
A supplementa
on the same set o
-40
Abstract Full text PDF Unique visitors open access publi
being cited by
Fig 2 | Percentage differences (95% confidence intervals) in confidence interv
Davisdownloads of open access articles (n=247) andarticle downloads, and table at
PM et al. Open access publishing, subscription mentary
access articles (n=1371) during the first six months after although this effe
citations: randomised controlled trial. BMJ
publication. Downloads from known internet robots are 2008.
excluded doi:10.1136/bmj.a568 DISCUSSION

31. Outlook

32. First issue April 2010, accepts submissions since
October 2009
Aims for papers similar to Nature, but without the
same broad impact
Hybrid publishing model, costs calculated for
100% Open Access
Online only, no editorials, news, etc.

33. Press Release Nr. 57 (October 13, 2009)
Die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) baut
ihre Unterstützung des Open-Access-Publizierens
konsequent aus. Universitäten können künftig bei
der DFG Mittel beantragen, um Publikationen ihrer
Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler in
24
originären Open-Access-Zeitschriften zu
finanzieren. Deutsche Forsc

34. Franzen JL et al. PLoS ONE 2009 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005723

37. Special thanks to Peter Binfield,
Phil Vaughan, Lesley Anson,
Cameron Neylon, Victor Henning,
Richard Grant, Heinz Pampel and
Graham Steel