Abstract:

[Purposes]Taking four fields as an example, this study aims to analyze the role of OA on papers'journals.[Methods]In the field of integrative complementarymedicine,we compared the CNCIand the citation rate between OA papers and total papers from 2010-2014 in Top 20 high-publication countries/territories, institutions, and the indicators between OA journals and none-OA journals by use of InCites.We also used Web of Science to compare the impact between OA papers,none-OA papers and total papers in four fields of integrative complementary medicine, agronomy, cell tissue engineering, and behavioral sciences.[Findings]In the field of integrative complementarymedicine,the impactof OA papers are lower than those of total papers in Top 20 high-publication countries/territories, institutions, and journals.As a whole, the impact of OA papers is also lower than that of none-OA papers and total papers in four fields.[Conclusions]When OA is becoming popular,the quality of papers is still the decisive factor of the journals'impact.It cannot enhance the influence of journals only by OA.

Key words: Open Access, Category Normalized Citation Impact, Percentage of citation, Integrative complementary medicine

摘要：

【目的】以4个学科SCI论文为例,分析开放获取（OA）对期刊论文影响力的作用,以期对我国期刊OA发展提供启示。【方法】利用InCites数据库研究2010—2014年整合替代医学学科Top20高发文国家/地区、机构的OA论文与全部论文的被引率和CNCI的差异,并比较该学科OA期刊和非OA期刊的指标差异;利用Web of Science数据库比较整合替代医学、农学、细胞组织工程学和行为学4个学科OA论文与非OA及全部论文影响力的差异。【结果】整合替代医学在高发文国家/地区、高发文机构及高发文期刊等不同层面,OA论文整体上低于全部论文的影响力;在4个学科,2010—2014年OA论文整体上低于非OA论文和全部论文的影响力。【结论】当开放获取成为出版常态后,科技期刊之间的竞争核心仍然是论文质量,仅依靠OA并不能有效提升期刊论文的影响力。

关键词: 开放获取, CNCI, 被引率, 整合替代医学