Identifying predatory or pseudo-journals

International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 117-124

  Laine, Christine ^a,b   Winker, Margaret A ^a  

^a WAME   (United States)

^b AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CERTIFICATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LOW INCOME COUNTRY; MIDDLE INCOME COUNTRY; OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING; PUBLICATION; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENTIST;

EID: 85018816409     PISSN: 20086520     EISSN: 20086814     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.15171/ijoem.2017.1048     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Clark J, Smith R. Firm action needed on predatory journals. BMJ 2015;350:h210. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h210. Available from www.researchgate.net/profile/Jocalyn_Clark/publication/271022726_Firm_action_needed_on_predatory_journals/links/56f8f0cc08ae81582bf40ff0.pdf (Accessed February 14, 2017).
2. Wallace F, Perri T. Economists behaving badly: publications in predatory journals. Munich Personal RePec Archive 2016. Available from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/73075/1/MPRA_paper_73075.pdf (Accessed February 7, 2017).
3. Seethapathy GS, Santhosh Kumar JU, Hareesha AS. India's scientific publication in predatory journals: need for regulating quality of Indian science and education. Curr Sci 2016;111:1759-64. doi: 10.18520/cs/v111/i11/1759-1764. science.ac.in/.
4. Grant B. Elsevier published 6 fake journals. The Scientist 2009. Available from www.the-scientist. com/?articles.view/articleNo/27383/title/Elsevier-published-6-fake-journals/(Accessed February 7, 2017).
5. Bohannon J. Who's afraid of peer review? Science 2013;342:60-5. doi: 10.1126/science.342.6154.60
6. Davis P. Open access publisher accepts nonsense manuscript for dollars. Scholarly Kitchen 2009. Available from http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet. org/2009/06/10/nonsense-for-dollars (Accessed February 7, 2017).
7. Eriksson S, Helgesson G. The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics. Med Health Care and Philos 2016. doi:10.1007/s11019-016-9740-3.
8. Shen C, Bjork BC. ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Med 2015;13:230. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2.
9. Beall J. Beall's list of predatory publishers 2016. Scholarly Open Access. Formerly available from https://scholarlyoa.com/2017/01/03/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2017/
10. now available fromhttps://web.archive.org/web/20170113114519/https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/01/05/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2016/(Accessed February 7, 2017).
11. Chawla DM. Mystery as controversial list of predatory publishers disappears. Science 2017. doi:10.1126/science.aal0625. Available from www. sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/mystery-controversial-list-predatory-publishers-disappears (Accessed February 7, 2017).
12. COPE. Code of Conduct. Available from http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct (Accessed February 7, 2017).
13. COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME. Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing. June 22, 2015. Available from www.wame.org/about/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice (Accessed February 11, 2017).
14. Crawford W. “Trust me”: the other problem with 87% of Beall's lists. Walt at Random (blog). Jan 29, 2016. Available from http://walt.lishost. org/2016/01/trust-me-the-other-problem-with-87-of-bealls-lists/(Accessed February 11, 2017).
15. Brazilian Forum of Public Health Journals Editors and the Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva (Abrasco, Brazilian Public Health Association). Motion to repudiate Mr. Jeffrey Beall's classist attack on SciELO. SciELO in Perspective 2015. Available from http://blog.scielo.org/en/2015/08/02/motion-to-repudiate-mr-jeffrey-bealls-classist-attackon-scielo/(Accessed February 11, 2017).
16. Coyle K. Predatory publishers - peer to peer review. Library Journal. April 4, 2013. Available from http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/04/opinion/peer-to-peer-review/predatory-publishers-peer-to-peer-review/#_ (Accessed February 7, 2017).
17. Emery J. Heard on the net: it's a small world after all: traveling beyond the viewpoint of American exceptionalism to the rise of the author. Charleston Advisor 2013;15:67-8. doi:10.5260/chara.15.2.67.
18. Crawford W. “Ethics and access 1: the sad case of Jeffrey Beall.” Cites & Insights 2014;14:1-14. Available from http://citesandinsights.info/civ14i4.pdf (Accessed February 14, 2017).
19. Directory of Open Access Journals. Available from https://doaj.org/faq#whatis (Accessed February 11, 2017).
20. Think Check Submit. Available from http://thinkchecksubmit.org/(Accessed February 11, 2017).
21. Aggarwal R, Gogtay N, Kumar R, Sahni P. Indian Association of Medical Journal Editors. The revised guidelines of the Medical Council of India for academic promotions: need for a rethink. Natl Med J India 2016;29:1-5. Available from www.nmji.in/showBackIssue.asp?issn=0970-258X;year=2016;volume=29;issue=1;month=January-February (Accessed February 14, 2017).
22. Memon AR. ResearchGate is no longer reliable: leniency towards ghost journals may decrease its impact on the scientific community. J Pakistan Med Assoc 2016;66:1643-7. Available from www.jpma. org.pk/full_article_text.php?article_id=8019 (Accessed February 11, 2017).