Predatory journals: Do not judge journals by their Editorial Board Members

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 691-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Ruiter-Lopez ◽  
Sandra Lopez-Leon ◽  
Diego A. Forero
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaman M AlAhmad ◽  
Ibrahim Abdelhafez ◽  
Farhan S Cyprian ◽  
Faruk Skenderi ◽  
Saghir Akhtar ◽  
...  

Predatory or pseudo journals have recently come into focus due to their massive internet expansion and extensive spam email soliciting. Recent studies explored this urging problem in several biomedical disciplines. In the present study, we identified 69 potential predatory (pseudo) pathology journals that were contrasted to 89 legitimate pathology journals obtained from the major bibliographic databases. All potential predatory journals in pathology shared at least one of the features proposed by previous studies (e.g. a poor web-site integrity, submissions via email, unclear or ambiguous peer-review process, missing names of the editorial board members, missing or pending the journal ISSN). Twenty-one (30%) of the potential predatory pathology journals had misleading titles mimicking those of legitimate journals. Only one of the identified journals was listed in the Directory of Open Access journals whereas none (0%) was indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE or Web of Science, listed in the Committee on Publication Ethics nor have they had a legitimate impact factor in the Journal Citation Reports.


2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-331
Author(s):  
Daryl D. Buss
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Celso Cunha
Keyword(s):  

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
Martin Bergen
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elke Maurer ◽  
Nike Walter ◽  
Tina Histing ◽  
Lydia Anastasopoulou ◽  
Thaqif El Khassawna ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Along with emerging open access journals (OAJ) predatory journals increasingly appear. As they harm accurate and good scientific research, we aimed to examine the awareness of predatory journals and open access publishing among orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Methods In an online survey between August and December 2019 the knowledge on predatory journals and OAJ was tested with a hyperlink made available to the participants via the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU) email distributor. Results Three hundred fifty orthopaedic and trauma surgeons participated, of which 291 complete responses (231 males (79.4%), 54 females (18.6%) and 5 N/A (2.0%)) were obtained. 39.9% were aware of predatory journals. However, 21.0% knew about the “Directory of Open Access Journals” (DOAJ) as a register for non-predatory open access journals. The level of profession (e.g. clinic director, consultant) (p = 0.018) influenced the awareness of predatory journals. Interestingly, participants aware of predatory journals had more often been listed as corresponding authors (p < 0.001) and were well published as first or last author (p < 0.001). Awareness of OAJ was masked when journal selection options did not to provide any information on the editorial board, the peer review process or the publication costs. Conclusion The impending hazard of predatory journals is unknown to many orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Early stage clinical researchers must be trained to differentiate between predatory and scientifically accurate journals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document