No abstract available.
Peer Review/*ethics ; *Publishing

The road to publication can seem long and daunting. Further, access to published work is often limited to larger institutions that can afford expensive journal subscription fees. Gold open-access publications aimed to change the landscape of evidence-based science, allowing papers to be widely accessible without a subscription, often requiring an article processing fee paid by the author or institution. Regardless of the access model, reputable journals are expected to adhere to the publishing code of ethics and provide transparency in the peer review process. While the latter can significantly increase the length of processing time through multiple revisions, editors and peer reviewers provide expert opinions and valuable feedback, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the journal and the scientific process.
Publishing ; Codes of Ethics ; Feedback

No abstract available.
Humans ; Peer Review/*ethics ; Professional Misconduct/*ethics ; Publishing/*ethics

Publishing scholarly articles in traditional and newly-launched journals is a responsible task, requiring diligence from authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers. The current generation of scientific authors has ample opportunities for publicizing their research. However, they have to selectively target journals and publish in compliance with the established norms of publishing ethics. Over the past few years, numerous illegitimate or predatory journals have emerged in most fields of science. By exploiting gold Open Access publishing, these journals paved the way for low-quality articles that threatened to change the landscape of evidence-based science. Authors, reviewers, editors, established publishers, and learned associations should be informed about predatory publishing practices and contribute to the trustworthiness of scholarly publications. In line with this, there have been several attempts to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate journals by blacklisting unethical journals (the Jeffrey Beall's list), issuing a statement on transparency and best publishing practices (the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association's and other global organizations' draft document), and tightening the indexing criteria by the Directory of Open Access Journals. None of these measures alone turned to be sufficient. All stakeholders of science communication should be aware of multiple facets of unethical practices and publish well-checked and evidence-based articles.
Communication ; Disclosure/*ethics ; *Ethics, Research ; Fraud/*ethics ; Information Dissemination/*ethics ; Medical Writing ; Periodicals as Topic/ethics ; Publishing/*ethics ; Science/*ethics

Medical research should be fully transparent. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of author-related conflict of interest (COI) policies and evaluate the actual state of COI disclosure in Korean medical journals. To determine the prevalence of author-related COI policies, we examined the 198 medical journals listed in the KoreaMed database. To investigate the actual state of COI disclosures in published papers, we analyzed the publications in a representative medical journal, the Journal of the Korean Medical Science, from the perspective of the relevance of the ethics of COI disclosure. A total of 164 (82.8%) journals required an author's statement of COI as a criterion for publication. Of these 164, most of them focused on financial COI, with 101 (61.6%) presenting the information related to COI disclosures as a separate paragraph with a clear title. We identified 114 articles published by the Journal of the Korean Medical Science over a seven-year period, from January, 2006 to December, 2012. Of these, 65 papers (57%) included an author's statement of COI. We found that the policies of Korean medical journals regarding the disclosure of author COIs are still behind the internationally suggested level.
*Conflict of Interest ; Disclosure/*ethics ; Editorial Policies ; Periodicals as Topic/ethics ; Publishing/ethics ; Republic of Korea

This article explains the relationship between open-access publications and pseudo-journals, and explores their characteristics including predatory journals and journal hijackers. Pseudo-journals and pseudo-conferences cause the disruption of academic development by spreading low quality information as well as the violation of research ethics by abusing research funds. Finally, preventive measures are described from the perspective of journal authors/researchers, institutions/funding organizations, and journal editors.
Ethics, Research ; Financial Management ; Fraud ; Open Access Publishing ; Periodicals as Topic

Researchers have an ethical responsibility to report the results of research involving human subjects. Dissemination of results ensures that patient care is based on good science and that the field of medicine advances based on complete and accurate knowledge. However, current evidence suggests that publication is often neglected or substantially delayed, especially in the case of negative and inconclusive results. Researchers, editors and reviewers should value all high-quality research regardless of the conclusiveness of the results and ensure that all research involving human subjects is registered in a publicly accessible database.
Clinical Trials as Topic/*ethics ; *Ethics, Research ; Human Experimentation/*ethics ; Publishing/*ethics ; Republic of Korea ; *Research Report ; Research Subjects

No abstract available.
Authorship ; Editorial Policies ; Peer Review/ethics ; Publishing/ethics* ; Scientific Misconduct ; Periodicals as Topic

No abstract available.
Humans ; Peer Review, Research/*ethics ; Periodicals as Topic ; Publishing/*ethics ; Research Personnel

No abstract available.
Humans ; Journal Impact Factor ; Publishing/ethics/*standards ; Research ; Research Personnel/ethics