Open-access publishing,a double-edged blade

To the Editor:

I daily receive requests from Editors to publish my articles in their open-access journal, independently from my field of interest. A mischievous question infiltrated my mind. Given the commercial aspects, should open-access journals have an interest in publishing the highest number of received papers at the expense of their quality?

Obviously, this is a provocative query, but it opens an issue that has arisen since the introduction of the open-access method of publishing.

Free and easy access to articles is the strength of open access publishing; such a philosophy is a praiseworthy attempt to facilitate clinicians and researchers who do not have the means to sustain the high access or subscription fees raised by non-open access journals. However, although many journals do offer waivers for open access publications, the cost of publishing in an open-access journal frequently exceeds the budget of the majority of researchers and, therefore, only institutions with higher levels of funding are able to sustain such expenses (1).

Whereas free access to a scientific paper undoubtedly is a resource that potentially enables a large diffusion of knowledge, on the other hand the risk of pauperization of the scientific literature due to the inaccessible publication costs does exist (1). Furthermore, the number of open-access journals has risen exponentially over time and in some cases the qualitative level is quite poor; unfortunately, headaches, migraine and facial pain topics have not skimped on the phenomenon. The review process requires adequate time and qualified reviewers, who have to respect the date requested by the Editor for sending their comments, essential elements that are not always observed. Independently from the journal, should one or more of those main features not be respected, the entire process will be affected. Moreover, the possibility of free access to scientific information is an unquestionable resource that potentially concerns both fair scientific competition and everyday clinical practice. Therefore, from the perspective of inducing wider improvement of knowledge, the quality of manuscripts should respond to severe control. Although this latter is provided by a large number of open and non-open access journals, in other cases the value of the papers appears to be sacrificed at the expense of the number of published manuscripts. Therefore, in some cases, their credibility might be questionable.

Despite the fact that the increase in the offer does not necessarily mean a better quality product, some open-access journals in the field of headache do indeed have a good level of quality, proven by the excellence of the published papers and the committee of experts on the editorial board, and of the reviewers.

Last but not least, researchers who have the privilege of working in wealthier foundations or institutions are facilitated in their academic career, which is essentially based on publication activity and citations.