<mods:mods version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>Use made of open access journals by Indian researchers to publish their findings</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">Madhan</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Muthu</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">Arunachalam</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Subbiah</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:abstract>Most of the papers published in the more than 360 Indian open access journals are by Indian&#13;
researchers. But how many papers do they publish in high impact international open access journals?&#13;
We have looked at India’s contribution to all seven Public Library of Science (PLoS) journals,&#13;
10 BioMed Central (BMC) journals and Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports.&#13;
Indian crystallographers have published more than 2,000 structure reports in Acta Crystallographica,&#13;
second only to China in number of papers, but have a much better citations per paper average than&#13;
USA, Britain, Germany and France, China and South Korea. India’s contribution to BMC and&#13;
PLoS journals, on the other hand, is modest at best. We suggest that the better option for India is&#13;
institutional self-archiving.</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">Livelihoods</mods:classification><mods:classification authority="lcc">Information Science</mods:classification><mods:originInfo><mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8061">2011</mods:dateIssued></mods:originInfo><mods:originInfo><mods:publisher>Indian Academy of Sciences</mods:publisher></mods:originInfo><mods:genre>Article</mods:genre></mods:mods>