RESUMEN
Currently, a large number of predatory journals have proliferated. Their purpose is to obtain fraudulent profits by promising the rapid publication of scientific works, without fulfilling the services of quality review. These publishers have managed to copy the models of open access journals, which is why they are increasingly difficult to identify, coupled with the fact that many of them have opened spaces in the most important indexes of scientific journals, such as Medline, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Embase, among others. These publishers cheat not only the authors of the research they intend to publish but also the readers and general public with publications that have not been reviewed and evaluated properly by a system of peers or academic experts. Therefore, the aim of this work is to make known some of the most common practices of predatory journals, so that anyone interested in the editorial process, whether as an author, editor or reader, has the elements to identify these fraudulent journals, and this bad practice in the editorial process.
Actualmente han proliferado una gran cantidad de revistas depredadoras, cuyo fin es obtener ganancias fraudulentas mediante la promesa de la publicación rápida de trabajos científicos, sin cumplir con los servicios de una revisión de calidad. Estas editoriales han logrado copiar los modelos de las revistas con acceso abierto, por lo que cada vez son más difíciles de identificar, aunado a que muchas de ellas se han abierto espacios en los índices más importantes de las revistas científicas, como Medline, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Embase, entre otros. Estas editoriales defraudan no solo a los autores de las investigaciones que intentan publicar sino también a los lectores y al público en general con publicaciones que no han sido debidamente revisadas y evaluadas por un sistema de pares o expertos académicos. Por lo tanto, el objetivo de este trabajo es dar a conocer algunas de las prácticas más comunes de las revistas depredadoras para que toda persona interesada en el proceso editorial, ya sea como autor, editor o lector, tenga los elementos para identificar estas revistas fraudulentas y esta mala práctica en el proceso editorial.
Asunto(s)
Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/normas , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/ética , Políticas Editoriales , Mala Conducta Científica/ética , Edición/normasRESUMEN
Health sciences librarians often lack knowledge of the motivations behind faculty publishing behavior. This study establishes some understanding of their choices through interviews with academic health sciences faculty members. Knowledge of the concepts of open access was lacking, as was the differences between open access and predatory publishing. Faculty had varied opinions on publication without robust peer review, its ethical implications, manuscript quality, and trust in scientific publishing. Evidence from this study suggests that librarians must take an active role in shaping the future of scholarly communication through education, advocacy, and a commitment to moving science forward equitably and ethically.
Asunto(s)
Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Humanos , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/normas , Femenino , Masculino , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Edición/normas , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Bibliotecólogos , Entrevistas como AsuntoRESUMEN
Open access (OA) publishing provides free online access to research articles without subscription fees. In Brazil, absence of financial support from academic institutions and limited government policies pose challenges to OA publication. Here, we used data from the Web of Science and Scopus to compare with global trends in journal accessibility and scientific quality metrics. Brazilian authors publish more OA articles, particularly in Global South journals. While OA correlates with quality for global authors, it had no impact on Brazilian science. To maximize impact, Brazilian authors should prioritize Q1 journals regardless of OA status. High-impact or Global North journal publication seems more relevant for Brazilian science than OA. Our findings indicate that the present open access policy has been ineffective to improve the impact of Brazilian science, providing insights to guide the formulation of scientific public policies.
Asunto(s)
Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Brasil , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/tendencias , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/economía , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/tendencias , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Bibliometría , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Acceso a la Información , Edición/tendencias , Edición/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Open-access publishing expanded opportunities to give visibility to research results but was accompanied by the proliferation of predatory journals (PJos) that offer expedited publishing but potentially compromise the integrity of research and peer review. To our knowledge, to date, there is no comprehensive global study on the impact of PJos in the field of oncology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 29 question-based cross-sectional survey was developed to explore knowledge and practices of predatory publishing and analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-six complete responses to the survey were reported. Almost half of the responders reported feeling pressure to publish from supervisors, institutions, and funding and regulatory agencies. The majority of authors were contacted by PJos through email solicitations (67.8%), with fewer using social networks (31%). In total, 13.4% of the responders confirmed past publications on PJo, convinced by fast editorial decision time, low article-processing charges, limited peer review, and for the promise of academic boost in short time. Over half of the participants were not aware of PJo detection tools. We developed a multivariable model to understand the determinants to publish in PJos, showing a significant correlation of practicing oncology in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and predatory publishing (odds ratio [OR], 2.02 [95% CI, 1.01 to 4.03]; P = .04). Having previous experience in academic publishing was not protective (OR, 3.81 [95% CI, 1.06 to 13.62]; P = .03). Suggestions for interventions included educational workshops, increasing awareness through social networks, enhanced research funding in LMICs, surveillance by supervisors, and implementation of institutional actions against responsible parties. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of predatory publishing poses an alarming problem in the field of oncology, globally. Our survey identified actionable risk factors that may contribute to vulnerability to PJos and inform guidance to enhance research capacity broadly.
Asunto(s)
Oncología Médica , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Revisión de la Investigación por Pares/normas , Edición/normasAsunto(s)
Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/normas , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/ética , Humanos , Acceso a la Información , Difusión de la Información/métodos , Edición/normas , OftalmologíaAsunto(s)
Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Investigación , Japón , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/legislación & jurisprudencia , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/tendencias , Investigación/economía , Investigación/legislación & jurisprudencia , Investigación/tendencias , Informe de Investigación/legislación & jurisprudenciaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: While Open Access (OA) journals provide free access to articles, they entail high article processing charges (APC), limiting opportunities for young researchers and those from low-middle income countries to publish OA. METHODS: Cross-sectional study, evaluating APC and academic impact of full OA (FOA) journals in infectious diseases (ID) and clinical microbiology (CM) compared to hybrid journals. Data were collected from Journal Citation Reports and journals' websites. RESULTS: Among 255 journals, median APC was 2850 (interquartile range [IQR] 1325-3654$). Median APC for 120 FOA journals was significantly lower than for 119 hybrid journals (2000, IQR 648-2767$ versus 3550, IQR 2948-4120$, p < 0.001). FOA journals had lower citation numbers and impact metrics compared to hybrid journals. CONCLUSION: While FOA ID/CM journals have lower APCs, they also lower academic impact compared to hybrid journals. These findings highlight the need for reforms in the publication process in view of achieving equitable data dissemination.
Asunto(s)
Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedades Transmisibles/epidemiología , Microbiología , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Publicación de Acceso Abierto , Acceso a la Información , Bibliometría , Edición/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
In recent years, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of predatory journals has increased significantly. Predatory journals exploit the "open-access model" by engaging in deceptive practices such as charging high publication fees without providing the expected quality and performing insufficient or no peer review. Such behaviors undermine the integrity of scientific research and can result in researchers having trouble identifying reputable publication opportunities, particularly early-career researchers who struggle to understand and establish the correct criteria for publication in reputable journals. Publishing in journals that do not fully cover the criteria for scientific publication is also an ethical issue. This review aimed to describe the characteristics of predatory journals, differentiate between reliable and predatory journals, investigate the reasons that lead researchers to publish in predatory journals, evaluate the negative impact of predatory publications on the scientific community, and explore future perspectives. The authors also provide some considerations for researchers (particularly early-career researchers) when selecting journals for publication, explaining the role of metrics, databases, and artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation, with a specific focus on and relevance to publication in veterinary medicine.