An interesting study regarding predatory journals has been published.
“Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison” by Shamseer et al identifies 13 evidence-based characteristics by which predatory journals may potentially be distinguished from presumed legitimate journals. These may be useful for authors who are assessing journals for possible submission or for others, such as universities evaluating candidates’ publications as part of the hiring process. The 13 characteristics are summarized in the article:
|
1. |
The scope of interest includes non-biomedical subjects alongside biomedical topics |
|
2. |
The website contains spelling and grammar errors |
|
3. |
Images are distorted/fuzzy, intended to look like something they are not, or which are unauthorized |
|
4. |
The homepage language targets authors |
|
5. |
The Index Copernicus Value is promoted on the website |
|
6. |
Description of the manuscript handling process is lacking |
|
7. |
Manuscripts are requested to be submitted via email |
|
8. |
Rapid publication is promised |
|
9. |
There is no retraction policy |
|
10. |
Information on whether and how journal content will be digitally preserved is absent |
|
11. |
The Article processing/publication charge is very low (e.g., < $150 USD) |
|
12. |
Journals claiming to be open access either retain copyright of published research or fail to mention copyright |
|
13. |
The contact email address is non-professional and non-journal affiliated (e.g., @gmail.com or @yahoo.com) |