A recent blog post on the BioMed Central Blog spotlights the scientific merits of open access literature and debates the question of who should pay for scientific publishing.

In recent months, the U.S. Congress has reviewed legislation on both sides: the Research Works Act (designed to block the National Institutes of Health’s Public Access Policy) and the Federal Research Public Access Act (requires that all research should become open access regardless of how it is published within six months of publication). A report released in the UK in June 2012 wholeheartedly backs the open access movement.

Additionally, BMC Medicine has published an article which compared the scientific impact of both open access and traditional pay per view publishing and found that both of these types of publishing produced high quality peer reviewed articles.

1. Bjork B-C, Solomon D. Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact. BMC Medicine 2012; 10: 73. (open access)