Share Plot

& in common

Archive for June 2008

Bioethics Journals: 88% Obscure

leave a comment »

A Twitter friend, “orgmonkey“, recently sent me a link to a post on the openness of ethics journals. Jim Till, of Be openly accessible or be obscure, examines the open access policies and the frequency of “free full text” (FFT) publication in leading bioethics journals. In “Assessing medical ethics journals”, Till uses three, free, online tools to build his lists of highly ranked ethics journals: eigenFACTOR.org, Journal-Ranking.com, and SCImago Journal & Country Rank. Thereby avoiding the standard (but not “open”) tool for this sort of research—Thomson Reuters’ Citation Indexes and Journal Citation Reports. Till’s method identified seven, top-ranked titles, publishing a total of 1,472 articles in two years, and providing FFT (as indicated by PubMed) to 181 articles. (Note, however, that 178 of these FFT articles were published in one journal, BMJ’s Journal of Medical Ethics.) Which means that Till’s “leading” bioethics journals are about 12% open (181/1472) – or, to borrow a term from the title of Till’s blog, 88% (1291/1472) “obscure”. In contrast, a similar analysis by Till of immunology journals found that the three top-ranked titles of the field were about 41% open (274/672)—see: “Assessing immunology journals”, 16 April 2008.

If Till’s analysis is correct and bioethics journals are comparatively “obscure”, his post opens the door to three questions:

1. Why are bioethics journals “obscure”?
2. Should ethicists, editors, readers and publishers do anything about this obscurity?
3. If so, what should or could be done to encourage an increase in open access publication of ethics literature?

I have a few ideas on the first question, an opinion on the second, and (thus far) not much to offer on the third. However, if I find the time to share, rest assured that my thoughts here are always “open” and hopefully “accessible”.

Written by Jere

June 28, 2008 at 12:06 am

Posted in Ethics

Tagged with ,

Who Needs “Gray Literature”?

leave a comment »

Bioethics readers and writers may be among some of the biggest consumers of gray literature. The consumption and production of gray literature in bioethics will never equal the pace set by scientists employed by large governmental agencies like NASA, but the advisory and consultative nature of the discipline lends itself to the “gray” pages. Ethics commissions and committees are often international, non-governmental, semi-governmental, interdisciplinary, and (of course) not-for-profit. Given these circumstances, and the general value to be found in making ethical guidelines and reports broadly available, many of these documents will be published in ways that are not easily indexed or discovered.

While ethics researchers can find some of this literature with careful internet search engine strategies, searching the wide open Web may not be the most efficient way to browse and to discover new “gray” bioethics publications. Although Brian S. Matthews (C&RL News, March 2004, Vol. 65, No. 3) provides a long, useful list, for finding gray literature, few of these are likely to include bioethics material. I did, however, recently use one of these, The New York Academy of Medicine Grey Literature Report, to find a “gray” publication on the ethical issues relevant to pandemic influenza preparedness – The Eleventh Futures Forum [PDF – 515 KB] – a recent publication of the WHO.

The NYAM Grey Literature Report appears to be a useful tool, but will I remember to use it in the future? I guess one thing that worries me about search tools specifically devoted to “gray literature” is the concept itself. Who thinks to themselves while researching, “I need to check the ‘gray literature'”? In short, the concept serves librarians, publishers, and (perhaps) tenure committees well. Those who evaluate publications, index titles, or build collections will find that segregating documents into a “gray” pile is, from time-to-time, a necessity. Others, however, are likely to find this material (if they know what they are looking for) without thinking about the “gray” status of the literature.

Written by Jere

June 7, 2008 at 12:04 am

Posted in Ethics

Tagged with