Promoting awareness of open access publishing in speech-language therapy and audiology: Lessons from multilingual language assessment research.
Juan Bornman, Mellissa Bortz, Anita Edwards, Brenda Louw, Jeannie Van der Linde
PMID 41925609WHAT IT FOUND
This is an opinion piece arguing that open access publishing helps South African speech-language therapists and audiologists reach research they can actually use.
It reports no patients and no outcomes, so nothing here changes clinical practice.
What this paper is
This is a clinical perspective opinion piece written by South African academics in speech-language therapy and audiology. It argues that open access publishing helps clinicians get hold of research, explains the main open access models (gold, green, diamond or platinum, and bronze, plus read-and-publish agreements), and lists practical routes for clinicians who want to read or publish research, such as article fee waivers for low- and middle-income countries, library consortia, self-archived copies and asking authors directly. It reports no patients, no data and no outcomes. There is no finding here to act on.
Declared interests
The authors state that the work received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. They also disclose that all authors work as academics in speech-language therapy and audiology, and say this position shapes how they see publishing costs and access.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that open access publishing improves patient care or clinical outcomes. The paper presents no data and no patients, and every claim in it is the authors' argument rather than a tested result.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →