Predatory Publishing Is a Threat to Non-Mainstream Science.
10.3346/jkms.2017.32.5.713
- Author:
Armen Yuri GASPARYAN
1
;
Bekaidar NURMASHEV
;
Elena E UDOVIK
;
Anna M KOROLEVA
;
George D KITAS
Author Information
1. Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK. a.gasparyan@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Review
- Keywords:
Publication Ethics;
Periodicals as Topic;
Bibliographic Databases;
Non-Mainstream Science
- MeSH:
Accidental Falls;
Databases, Bibliographic;
Periodicals as Topic;
Specialization;
Writing
- From:Journal of Korean Medical Science
2017;32(5):713-717
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
This article highlights the issue of wasteful publishing practices that primarily affect non-mainstream science countries and rapidly growing academic disciplines. Numerous start-up open access publishers with soft or nonexistent quality checks and huge commercial interests have created a global crisis in the publishing market. Their publishing practices have been thoroughly examined, leading to the blacklisting of many journals by Jeffrey Beall. However, it appears that some subscription journals are also falling short of adhering to the international recommendations of global editorial associations. Unethical editing agencies that promote their services in non-mainstream science countries create more problems for inexperienced authors. It is suggested to regularly monitor the quality of already indexed journals and upgrade criteria of covering new sources by the Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science), Scopus, and specialist bibliographic databases. Regional awareness campaigns to inform stakeholders of science communication about the importance of ethical writing, transparency of editing services, and permanent archiving can be also helpful for eradicating unethical publishing practices.
