---
author:
- affiliation:
  - id: https://ror.org/027bh9e22
    name: Leiden University
  contributor_roles: []
  family: Waltman
  given: Ludo
  url: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8249-1752
- contributor_roles: []
  family: Kramer
  given: Bianca
  url: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5965-6560
- affiliation:
  - id: https://ror.org/02twcfp32
    name: Crossref
  contributor_roles: []
  family: Hendricks
  given: Ginny
  url: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0353-2702
blog:
  authors:
  - name: Crossref Staff
  community_id: 093ada45-3a02-4007-b8b6-be28f221e01d
  created: 1780876800
  current_feed_url: null
  description: Recent content in Blog on Crossref
  doi: https://doi.org/10.64000/crossref
  favicon: https://rogue-scholar.org/api/communities/093ada45-3a02-4007-b8b6-be28f221e01d/logo
  feed_format: application/atom+xml
  feed_url: https://www.crossref.org/blog/feed.xml
  filter: null
  generator: Hugo
  home_page_url: https://www.crossref.org/blog/
  issn: null
  language: eng
  license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
  prefix: '10.64000'
  relative_url: null
  secure: null
  slug: crossref
  status: active
  subfield: '1710'
  title: Crossref Blog
  updated: 1786645896
  use_api: null
container: Crossref Blog
date: '2020-09-25T00:00:00+00:00'
date_updated: '2026-07-20T11:46:04+00:00'
guid: https://doi.org/10.64000/94km7-h9a72
identifier: https://doi.org/10.64000/94km7-h9a72
image: https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/i4oa-chart.png
images:
- alt: Publishers with abstracts in Crossref
  src: https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/i4oa-chart.png
  width: 100%
- src: https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/i4oa-chart.png
issn: null
keywords:
- Collaboration
- Community
- Content Registration
- Crossref
- Metadata
lang: en
license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
rid: 4r0b3-sqb63
rights: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
summary: The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA) launched this week. The initiative
  calls on scholarly publishers to make the abstracts of their publications openly
  available. More specifically, publishers that work with Crossref to register DOIs
  for their publications are requested to include abstracts in the metadata they deposit
  in Crossref.
title: 'Open Abstracts: Where are we?'
url: https://www.crossref.org/blog/open-abstracts-where-are-we/
version: v1
---

The [Initiative for Open Abstracts
(I4OA)](https://i4oa.org){target="_blank"} launched this week. The
initiative calls on scholarly publishers to make the abstracts of their
publications openly available. More specifically, publishers that work
with Crossref to register DOIs for their publications are requested to
include abstracts in the metadata they deposit in Crossref. These
abstracts will then be made openly available by Crossref. 39 publishers
have already agreed to join I4OA and to open their abstracts.

Where are we at the moment in terms of openness of abstracts? For an
individual publisher working with Crossref, the percentage of the
publisher\'s content for which an abstract is available in Crossref can
be found in Crossref\'s [Participation
Reports](https://www.crossref.org/members/prep){target="_blank"}. The
chart presented below gives the overall picture (as of September 1,
2020) for medium-sized and large publishers working with Crossref. The
vertical axis shows the number of journal articles of a publisher in the
period 2018-2020. Because of the large differences between publishers in
the number of articles they publish, this axis has a logarithmic scale.
The horizontal axis shows the percentage of the articles of a publisher
for which an abstract is available in Crossref. The orange dots
represent publishers that have agreed to join I4OA. The publishers
colored in blue have not yet agreed to join the initiative.

::: {style="text-align:center;margin:10px"}
<figure>
<img src="https://www.crossref.org/images/blog/i4oa-chart.png"
style="width:100.0%" alt="Publishers with abstracts in Crossref" />
</figure>
:::

A similar chart was published a few months ago in [this blog post on the
importance of open
abstracts](https://medium.com/@aarontay/why-openly-available-abstracts-are-important-overview-of-the-current-state-of-affairs-bb7bde1ed751){target="_blank"}.
Comparing the above chart with the one published a few months ago, the
first effects of I4OA are already visible. While for most publishers the
percentage of abstracts available in Crossref has hardly changed, it has
increased from 11% to 95% for the Royal Society, one of the founding
publishers of I4OA. This reflects the efforts the Royal Society has made
over the past months to improve the availability of abstracts in
Crossref for its content, not only for new content but also for existing
content. For SAGE, another founding publisher of I4OA, the percentage of
abstracts available in Crossref has increased from 38% to 50%. A further
increase can be expected to take place in the coming months. The third
founding publisher of I4OA, Hindawi, has remained at a stable level,
with abstracts being available for 97% of its content.

The above chart shows that many publishers supporting I4OA are already
making abstracts available in Crossref. Other publishers do not yet make
abstracts available in Crossref but have nevertheless decided to join
I4OA. This is the case for Frontiers, PLOS, and Karger, and also for
several smaller publishers not visible in the above chart, such as EMBO
and Ubiquity Press. These publishers are currently adjusting their
workflows and will start submitting abstracts to Crossref soon.

Of the publishers that have not yet joined I4OA, some may not yet be
aware of I4OA, while others may need more time to decide whether they
will join the initiative. As can be seen in the above chart, most
publishers that have not yet joined I4OA do not make abstracts available
in Crossref at the moment. However, some publishers have not yet joined
I4OA even though they do make abstracts available in Crossref. We hope
these publishers will join I4OA soon. By joining the initiative, these
publishers would formalize their commitment to openness of abstracts.

None of the publishers in the above chart makes abstracts available in
Crossref for 100% of its journal content. Some publishers, such as
Copernicus and Hindawi, are close to 100%, but even these publishers
have some content for which no abstract is available. Importantly, this
does not necessarily mean that publishers have failed to submit
abstracts to Crossref for some of their content. Instead, it may simply
mean that some of their journal content does not have an abstract.
Research articles usually have an abstract, but many other types of
content published in journals, such as book reviews, letters,
editorials, and corrections, often do not have an abstract. For most
publishers, it is therefore impossible to make abstracts available for
100% of their content. Moreover, since Crossref does not distinguish
between different types of content published in journals, we cannot
provide separate statistics on the availability of abstracts for
different types of journal content.

As an example, let\'s consider Brill, a publisher that has joined I4OA
and that mainly focuses on the humanities and social sciences. Abstracts
are available in Crossref for 57% of Brill\'s content in the period
2018-2020. This may suggest that Brill has failed to submit abstracts to
Crossref for a significant share of its content. However, when we look
up journal publications of Brill in 2018 and 2019 in the Web of Science
database, abstracts turn out to be available for only 68% of these
publications. Assuming that Web of Science has more or less complete
coverage of abstracts, this seems to indicate that Brill has already
submitted most of its abstracts to Crossref. In fact, Web of Science
shows that about a quarter of the publications of Brill are book reviews
and that hardly any of these book reviews has an abstract. This
illustrates why some publishers, for instance those that publish many
book reviews, cannot be expected to get close to 100% availability of
abstracts.

Despite the above caveats, it is clear that there is still a long way to
go in improving the availability of abstracts in Crossref. As of
September 1, 2020, abstracts were available for 21% of all journal
articles in Crossref in the period 2018-2020. In Web of Science (Science
Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts &
Humanities Citation Index), 86% of all journal publications in 2018 and
2019 that have a DOI also have an abstract.

Publishers who wish to distribute their abstracts openly through
Crossref can include them in the normal content registration process.
They can send XML to Crossref (using Crossref\'s metadata deposit
schema), either directly via HTTPS POST or via the Crossref admin
system. For back-content, a resubmission of the full XML is required. In
addition, various tools can be used to deposit abstracts. Open Journal
Systems (OJS) has a plugin that supports the depositing of abstracts.
Metadata Manager also facilitates this, but only for journal articles.
Crossref\'s web deposit form does not yet support abstracts, but
Crossref is working on this.

To keep track of the progress publishers are making in depositing
abstracts in Crossref, we plan to publish regular updates of the chart
presented above on the I4OA website. We look forward to witnessing the
impact of I4OA in the coming months!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Thank you to guest authors Bianca Kramer and Ludo Waltman, as well as
the other founding members of I4OA.*