Nice debate and difficult questions.
What I have heard about Open Access.
PROS
- FREE dissemination of scientific knowledge for any reader (researcher, clinician even patients)
- Advantage for the lower and middle income countries (LMICs) where access is scarce, restricted, and very hard to obtain
- Faster acquisition of research that would make a faster completion of my research (evidence needed)
- Government funded research (paid with my taxes) is finally open to the contributor (me).
- Avoids the “illegal sharing” of papers among authors
CONS
- High fees -> that will hurdle the creation of evidence? (evidence needed here) although waivers exist for LMICs
- “non-functioning” or unsustainable business model ?? (evidence needed and an expert in economic models)
Who does not want free information / research?
What would happen if suddenly ALL the journals would implement the OA model?
Unfortunately it's all about the money
COI.- I've been at the editorial board of paid and OA journals
--
Carlos A. Cuello-García, MD
Centre for Evidence-Based Practice & Knowledge TranslationIberoamerican Cochrane Collaboration
Tecnologico de Monterrey School of Medicine & Health Sciences
CITES piso 3. Morones Prieto 3000 pte. Col. Doctores 64710
Monterrey, NL. Mexico.
The content of this data transmission must not be considered an offer, proposal, understanding or agreement unless it is confirmed in a document signed by a legal representative of ITESM. The content of this data transmission is confidential and is intended to be delivered only to the addressees. Therefore, it shall not be distributed and/or disclosed through any means without the authorization of the original sender. If you are not the addressee, you are forbidden from using it, either totally or partially, for any purpose
