English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/162616
logo share SHARE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLeeuwen, Thed N. vanes_ES
dc.contributor.authorCostas, Rodrigoes_ES
dc.contributor.authorYegros Yegros, Alfredoes_ES
dc.contributor.authorMeijer, Ingeborges_ES
dc.identifier.citationSTI Conference (2017)es_ES
dc.descriptionTrabajo presentado a la Science, Technology and Innovation indicators (STI) Conference, celebrada en Paris (Francia) del 6 al 8 de septiembre de 2017.es_ES
dc.description.abstractIncreasingly, the academic communities are confronted with the demand to publish their findings in an open environment. Science policy and science management has a need for evidence of this change in publishing behavior, which results, as a consequence, in an increasing demand for bibliometric analysis of the shift towards Open Access (OA) publishing. In this study, covering the period 2009-2014, we present the outcomes of the development of OA labels on publications processed for the Web of Science (WoS), and in particular on the in-house version at CWTS. Main reason for this labeling of publications is the need for insight on OA publishing, while the WoS database currently does not serve this purpose well. We have chosen five data sources (DOAJ, ROAD, CrossRef, PubMedCentral, and OpenAIRE), leading to 7 different methods, from which we collect information to attribute OA labels to WoS publications. By using these five sources, we are able to distinguish between Gold and Green OA. Next, we calculated for EU countries the OA shares of the national outputs.; An important conclusion from the study is the increase of OA format publications for EU countries in the period we studies, while the countries with explicit OA mandates, the UK and the Netherlands, have the highest shares of OA output. Another important conclusion is that among the five sources, not one single source we used for attributing OA labels to the WoS publications is enough to cover the OA share among the national output, while it also varies among EU countries which source is most important.es_ES
dc.relation.isversionofPublisher's versiones_ES
dc.titleOpen Access & research metrics. Establishing reliable baselines for science policyes_ES
dc.title.alternativeDeveloping indicators on Open Access by combining evidence from diverse data sourceses_ES
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer reviewedes_ES
oprm.item.hasRevisionno ko 0 false*
Appears in Collections:(INGENIO) Comunicaciones congresos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
opemetric.pdf692,95 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
Show simple item record

WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.