Identifying predatory or pseudo-journals

Biochemia Medica

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 285-291

  Laine, Christine ^a   Winker, Margaret A ^a  

^a World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; METRIC SYSTEM; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; TURNAROUND TIME; HUMAN; INTERNET; OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING; PEER REVIEW; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

HUMANS; INTERNET; JOURNALISM; OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85020661397     PISSN: 13300962     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.11613/BM.2017.031     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Clark J, Smith R. Firm action needed on predatory journals [Electronic version]. BMJ 2015;350:h210. Accessed February 14th 2017. Available at: https://www. researchgate.net/profile/Jocalyn_Clark/publication/271022726_Firm_action_needed_on_predatory_journals/links/56f8f0cc08ae81582bf40ff0.pdf. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.h210
2. Wallace F, Perri T. Economists behaving badly: publications in predatory journals [Electronic version]. Munich Personal RePec Archive August 15, 2016. Accessed February 7th 2017. Available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/73075/1/MPRA_paper_73075.pdf
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. Available at: http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/111/11/1759.pdf. Accessed February 7th 2017. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v111/i11/1759-1764
4. Grant B. Elsevier published 6 fake journals [Electronic version]. Accessed February 7th 2017. Available at: http://www. the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27383/title/Elsevier-published-6-fake-journals/.
5. Bohannon J. Who’s afraid of peer review? Science 2013;342:60-65. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6154.60
6. Davis P. Open access publisher accepts nonsense manuscript for dollars [Electronic version]. Scholarly Kitchen June 10, 2009. Accessed February 7th 2017. Available at: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/10/nonsense-for-dollars.
7. Eriksson S, Helgesson G. The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics. Med Health Care and Philos 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-016-9740-3
8. Shen C, Pjork BC. ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Med 2015;13:230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2
9. Beall J. Beall’s list of predatory publishers 2016. Scholarly Open Access. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20170113114519/https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/01/05/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2016/. Accessed February 7th 2017.
10. Chawla DS. Mystery as controversial list of predatory publishers disappears. Available at: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/mystery-controversial-list-predatory-publishers-disappears. Accessed February 7 th 2017.
11. COPE. Code of Conduct. Available at: http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct. Accessed February 7 th 2017.
12. Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing. Available at: http://www.wame.org/about/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice. Accessed February 11, 2017.
13. Crawford W. “Trust me”: the other problem with 87% of Beall’s lists. Walt at Random (blog). Available at: http://walt. lishost.org/2016/01/trust-me-the-other-problem-with87-of-bealls-lists/. Accessed February 11th 2017.
14. Brazilian Forum of Public Health Journals Editors and the Brazilian Public Health Association (Abrasco). Motion to repudiate Mr. Jeffrey Beall’s classist attack on SciELO. Available at: http://blog.scielo.org/en/2015/08/02/motion-to-repudiate-mr-jeffrey-bealls-classist-attack-on-scielo/. Accessed February 11th 2017.
15. Coyle K. Predatory publishers. Peer to peer review. Available at: http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/04/opinion/peer-topeer-review/predatory-publishers-peer-to-peer-review/#_. Accessed February 7th 2017.
16. 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 2012;15:67–8. https://doi.org/10.5260/chara.15.2.67
17. Crawford W. Ethics and access 1: the sad case of Jeffrey Beall. Cites & Insights 2014;14:1–14. Available at: http://citesandinsights.info/civ14i4.pdf. Accessed February 14th 2017.
18. Directory of Open Access Journals. Available at: https://doaj.org/faq#whatis. Accessed February 11th 2017.
19. Think Check Submit. Available at: http://thinkchecksubmit.org. Accessed February 11th 2017.
20. Aggarwal R, Gogtay N, Kumar R, Sahni P; and for the Indian Association of Medical Journal Editors. The revised guidelines of the Medical Council of India for academic promotions: need for a rethink. Indian J Urol 2016;32:1–4. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.173117
21. Memon AR. ResearchGate is no longer reliable: leniency towards ghost journals may decrease its impact on the scientific community. J Pakistan Med Assoc 2016;66:1643-47.