↓ Skip to main content

Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
620 Mendeley
citeulike
27 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact
Published in
BMC Medicine, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-73
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In the past few years there has been an ongoing debate as to whether the proliferation of open access (OA) publishing would damage the peer review system and put the quality of scientific journal publishing at risk. Our aim was to inform this debate by comparing the scientific impact of OA journals with subscription journals, controlling for journal age, the country of the publisher, discipline and (for OA publishers) their business model.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 247 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 620 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 15 2%
Spain 9 1%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Sweden 5 <1%
Switzerland 4 <1%
Nigeria 4 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
New Zealand 3 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Other 37 6%
Unknown 531 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 101 16%
Student > Master 78 13%
Researcher 75 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 9%
Student > Bachelor 41 7%
Other 154 25%
Unknown 114 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 137 22%
Computer Science 75 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 58 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 53 9%
Arts and Humanities 39 6%
Other 135 22%
Unknown 123 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 273. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2026.
All research outputs
#163,900
of 34,251,523 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#153
of 5,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#588
of 194,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,251,523 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 194,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.