Re: Open Access means sloppy publications?

["Jan Szczepanski. Goteborgs Univ Bibl" <Jan.Szczepanski@ub.gu.se>]

First a question to Sally Morris:

Would you say that the more than 750 free scientific e-journals from 16
Iberoamerican countries in Latindex are sloppy too?

Secondly I want to ask:

Does anyone have a comment on these figuers showing sientific medical
Latin American journals reprsentation in some well known databases. Are we
talking about sloppy publications?

Medline 59
EMBASE 85
ISI 27
LILACS 659
___________

Jan Szczepanski
Frste bibliotekarie
Goteborgs universitetsbibliotek
Box 222
SE 405 30 Goteborg, SWEDEN
Tel: +46 31 773 1164 Fax: +46 31 163797
E-mail: Jan.Szczepanski@ub.gu.se
__________

At 02:55 2005-05-02, you wrote:
> The findings so far of our study comparing DOAJ with other journals does
> suggest that many more of them describe as 'peer review' a process that is
> totally or partially in-house;  I would have thought that correct
> 'classical' peer review was normally conducted by external 'peers', with
> the Editor-in-Chief having a final decision in case of differences of
> opinion.  See http://www.alpsp.org/openacc.htm#pres
>
> Sally
>
> Sally Morris, Chief Executive
> Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
> E-mail:  sally.morris@alpsp.org
> ALPSP Website  http://www.alpsp.org
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Funk" <mefunk@mail.med.cornell.edu>
> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Open Access and For-Pay Access (to the same IR materials)
>
> > Open Access means sloppy publications?
> >
> > "The impact factors of nearly 200 open-access journals are similar to
> > those of traditional journals in the same fields, according to a recent
> > Thomson ISI report. The 58 open-access medical journals that receive
> > impact factors fell, on average, at the 40th percentile of all medical
> > journals, with all but 11 ranking higher than the 10th percentile. For
> > life sciences journals, the 37 open-access journals were ranked, on
> > average, at the 39th percentile."
> >
> > http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040427/05/
> > http://www.isinet.com/media/presentrep/acropdf/impact-oa-journals.pdf
> >
> > Open Access is treasonous?
> > Does the Attorney General know this?
> >
> > Mark Funk
> > Head, Collection Development
> > Weill Cornell Medical Library
> > 1300 York Avenue
> > New York, NY 10021
> > mefunk@mail.med.cornell.edu
> >
> >
> > At 12:01 AM -0400 4/29/05, Joe Esposito wrote:
> > > But if we weren't willing to tolerate sloppiness, we never would have 
> > > clamored for Open Access, which is the seditious element.