Open access of evidence‐based publications

Abstract

The open access model, where researchers can publish their work and make it freely available to the whole medical community, is gaining ground over the traditional type of publication. However, fees are to be paid by either the authors or their institutions. The purpose of this paper is to assess the proportion and type of open access evidence‐based articles in the form of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in the field of musculoskeletal disorders and orthopedic surgery. PubMed database was searched and the results showed a maximal number of hits for low back pain and total hip arthroplasty. We demonstrated that despite a 10‐fold increase in the number of evidence‐based publications in the past 10 years, the rate of free systematic reviews in the general biomedical literature did not change for the last two decades. In addition, the average percentage of free open access systematic reviews and meta‐analyses for the commonest painful musculoskeletal conditions and orthopedic procedures was 20% and 18%, respectively. Those results were significantly lower than those of the systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in the remaining biomedical research. Such findings could indicate a divergence between the efforts engaged at promoting evidence‐based principles and those at disseminating evidence‐based findings in the field of musculoskeletal disease and trauma. The high processing fee is thought to be a major limitation when considering open access model for publication.