Differences between the impacts of Open Access (OA) and non-OA research have been observed over a wide range of citation and altmetric indicators, usually finding an Open Access Advantage (OAA) within specific fields. However, science-wide analyses covering multiple years, indicators and disciplines are lacking. Using citation counts and six altmetrics for 38.7M articles published 2011-21, we compare OA and non-OA papers. The results show that there is no universal OAA across all disciplines or impact indicators: the OAA for citations tends to be lower for more recent papers, whereas the OAAs for news, blogs and Twitter are consistent across years and unrelated to volume of OA publications, whereas the OAAs for Wikipedia, patents and policy citations are more complex. These results support different hypotheses for different subjects and indicators. The evidence is consistent with OA accelerating research impact in the Medical & Health Sciences, Life Sciences and the Humanities; that increased visibility or discoverability is a factor in promoting the translation of research into socio-economic impact; and that OA is a factor in growing online engagement with research in some disciplines. OAAs are therefore complex, dynamic, multi-factorial and require considerable analysis to understand.

翻译：开放获取（OA）与非开放获取研究的学术影响力差异已在广泛的引用和替代计量指标中被观察到，通常发现在特定领域内存在开放获取优势（OAA）。然而，目前缺乏涵盖多年、多指标和多学科的跨科学领域的综合分析。利用2011年至2021年间发表的3870万篇论文的引用次数和六项替代计量指标，我们比较了OA与非OA论文。结果表明，并不存在适用于所有学科或影响力指标的普遍性OAA：较新论文的引用OAA往往较低，而新闻、博客和Twitter的OAA在不同年份间保持稳定且与OA出版量无关，而维基百科、专利和政策引用的OAA则更为复杂。这些结果为不同学科和指标支持了不同的假设。证据表明，OA加速了医学与健康科学、生命科学和人文学科的研究影响力；可见性或可发现性的提升是促进研究成果转化为社会经济影响力的一个因素；并且OA是某些学科中在线研究参与度增长的一个因素。因此，OAA具有复杂性、动态性、多因素性，需要大量分析才能深入理解。