Comparar métodos

	Modelos de Publicación de Acceso Abierto	Proceso de Revisión por Pares
Campo	Ética de la publicación	Ética de la publicación
Familia	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Año de origen	2002	1665
Autor original	Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002); open science movement	Scientific publishing community; formalized by journals and COPE
Tipo	Standard	Process
Fuente seminal	Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002, revised 2012). Budapest Open Access Initiative.	Committee on Publication Ethics (2023). COPE Guidelines: Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. COPE.
Alias	OA Publishing, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access, Diamond OA	Peer Reviewing, Manuscript Evaluation, Scholarly Review
Relacionados	4	4
Resumen	Open access (OA) publishing removes subscription paywalls, making research freely available to all readers online without subscription fees. The Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) defined OA as the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, and link research freely. Multiple OA models exist: Gold OA (immediate free access, often author-funded via APCs), Green OA (free self-archiving in repositories), and Diamond OA (free to both authors and readers). OA expands research impact, enables global participation in science, and aligns with public funding mandates. However, OA models vary in sustainability and are sometimes exploited by predatory publishers.	Peer review is the process by which manuscripts are evaluated by experts in the same field before publication in academic journals. Reviewers assess the manuscript's scientific merit, methodology, clarity, and contribution to the field. Established in 1665 with the first scientific journal (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society), peer review remains the gold standard for quality control in academic publishing. Despite ongoing criticism and proposals for alternatives, peer review continues to filter low-quality and unethical work, though it is imperfect and sometimes slow.