RESUMO
Currently, a large number of predatory journals have proliferated. Their purpose is to obtain fraudulent profits by promising the rapid publication of scientific works, without fulfilling the services of quality review. These publishers have managed to copy the models of open access journals, which is why they are increasingly difficult to identify, coupled with the fact that many of them have opened spaces in the most important indexes of scientific journals, such as Medline, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Embase, among others. These publishers cheat not only the authors of the research they intend to publish but also the readers and general public with publications that have not been reviewed and evaluated properly by a system of peers or academic experts. Therefore, the aim of this work is to make known some of the most common practices of predatory journals, so that anyone interested in the editorial process, whether as an author, editor or reader, has the elements to identify these fraudulent journals, and this bad practice in the editorial process.
Actualmente han proliferado una gran cantidad de revistas depredadoras, cuyo fin es obtener ganancias fraudulentas mediante la promesa de la publicación rápida de trabajos científicos, sin cumplir con los servicios de una revisión de calidad. Estas editoriales han logrado copiar los modelos de las revistas con acceso abierto, por lo que cada vez son más difíciles de identificar, aunado a que muchas de ellas se han abierto espacios en los índices más importantes de las revistas científicas, como Medline, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Embase, entre otros. Estas editoriales defraudan no solo a los autores de las investigaciones que intentan publicar sino también a los lectores y al público en general con publicaciones que no han sido debidamente revisadas y evaluadas por un sistema de pares o expertos académicos. Por lo tanto, el objetivo de este trabajo es dar a conocer algunas de las prácticas más comunes de las revistas depredadoras para que toda persona interesada en el proceso editorial, ya sea como autor, editor o lector, tenga los elementos para identificar estas revistas fraudulentas y esta mala práctica en el proceso editorial.
Assuntos
Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/normas , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/normas , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Políticas Editoriais , Má Conduta Científica/ética , Editoração/normasAssuntos
Autoria , Publicação de Acesso Aberto , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Pesquisadores , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/economia , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/ética , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/economia , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Pesquisadores/economia , Países em DesenvolvimentoAssuntos
Ciência de Dados/métodos , Conjuntos de Dados como Assunto/ética , Indústrias/ética , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Ciências Sociais/métodos , Inteligência Artificial , Pesquisa Comportamental/economia , Pesquisa Comportamental/ética , Pesquisa Comportamental/métodos , Ciência de Dados/economia , Conjuntos de Dados como Assunto/economia , Democracia , Humanos , Indústrias/economia , Disseminação de Informação/ética , Disseminação de Informação/métodos , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/economia , Smartphone , Condições Sociais/estatística & dados numéricos , Ciências Sociais/economiaAssuntos
Bases de Dados Genéticas , Dissidências e Disputas , Genoma Viral/genética , Disseminação de Informação , Publicação de Acesso Aberto , Pesquisadores/psicologia , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Vacinas contra COVID-19/economia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/provisão & distribuição , Comportamento Cooperativo , Bases de Dados de Ácidos Nucleicos , Países Desenvolvidos/economia , Países em Desenvolvimento/economia , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação/ética , Disseminação de Informação/legislação & jurisprudência , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
ABSTRACT Background: Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. Methods: A web search was performed using the terms bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies. Results: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19 deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. Conclusion: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2021;73(1):1-5)
Assuntos
Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/ética , Má Conduta Científica , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/éticaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To describe the phenomenon of predatory publishing, its impact on the field of ophthalmology, and specific characteristics associated with predatory journals for authors to review prior to selecting a journal for submission of scientific work. DESIGN: Descriptive editorial article. METHODS: Literature review of currently published literature regarding the topic. RESULTS: Predatory publishing has had a significant impact on the quality of literature in the scientific world, on funding opportunities across countries and institutions, and on individual physician and scientist careers. There are a significant number of predatory journals in ophthalmology, but fewer than in other specialties. CONCLUSION: We must raise awareness about the existence of predatory publishing within ophthalmology, and must individually act to limit contributing to its growth by critically appraising each publisher and journal prior to submitting our scientific work.
Assuntos
Publicação de Acesso Aberto/normas , Oftalmologia/normas , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/normas , Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Pesquisa Biomédica/normas , Humanos , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Oftalmologia/ética , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares/ética , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares/normas , Má Conduta Científica/éticaRESUMO
The open access (OA) publishing, where a reader- pays economy has been replaced by an author-pays model, began at the end of the 20th century. This movement arose as an attempt to avoid excessive costs and copyright transfer agreements inherent to the subscription model.
Assuntos
Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/ética , Má Conduta CientíficaRESUMO
Background: Surgical research is potentially invasive, high-risk, and costly. Research that advances medical dogma must justify both its ends and its means. Although ethical questions do not always have simple answers, it is critically important for the clinician, researcher, and patient to approach these dilemmas and surgical research in a thoughtful, conscientious manner. Methods: We present four ethical issues in surgical research and discuss the opposing viewpoints. These topics were presented and discussed at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Surgical Infection Society as pro-con debates. The presenters of each opinion developed a succinct summary of their respective reviews for this publication. Results: The key subjects for these pro-con debates were: (1) Should patients be enrolled for time-sensitive surgical infection research using an opt-out or an opt-in strategy? (2) Should patients who are being enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing surgery with a non-operative intervention pay the costs of their treatment arm? (3) Should the scientific community embrace open access journals as the future of scientific publishing? (4) Should the majority of funding go to clinical or basic science research? Important points were illustrated in each of the pro-con presentations and illustrated the difficulties that are facing the performance and payment of infection research in the future. Conclusions: Surgical research is ethically complex, with conflicting demands between individual patients, society, and healthcare economics. At present, there are no clear answers to these and the many other ethical issues facing research in the future. Answers will only come from continued robust dialogue among all stakeholders in surgical research.
Assuntos
Ética em Pesquisa , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/ética , Comunicação , Congressos como Assunto , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/normas , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/economia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/ética , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/tratamento farmacológico , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/prevenção & controle , Fatores de TempoAssuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Fibrose Cística/terapia , Publicação de Acesso Aberto , Editoração , Pesquisa Biomédica/ética , Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Pesquisa Biomédica/tendências , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação/ética , Disseminação de Informação/métodos , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/normas , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares , Padrões de Prática Médica , Editoração/organização & administração , Editoração/normas , Editoração/tendências , Pesquisa Translacional BiomédicaRESUMO
We need to be vigilant against fake journals.
Assuntos
Enganação , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares/normas , Editoração/normas , HumanosRESUMO
Introduction: Predatory journals harm the integrity of science as principles of 'good scientific practice' are bypassed by omitting a proper peer-review process. Therefore, we aimed to explore the awareness of predatory journals among oncologists. Methods: An online survey among oncologists working in Germany or Austria of various professional surroundings was conducted between October 2018 and April 2019. Results: One hundred and eighty-eight participants (55 women (29.2%), 128 men (68.1%)) completed the questionnaire. 41 (21.8%) participants indicated to work in a hospital, 24 (12.8%) in private practice and 112 (59.6%) in a university hospital. 98.9% of participants indicated to actively read scientific articles and consider them in clinical decision-making (96.3%). 90.4% of participants indicated to have scientific experience by publishing papers in journals with peer-review system. The open-access system was known by 170 (90.4%), predatory journals by 131 (69.7%) and Beall's list by 52 participants (27.7%). Predatory journals were more likely to be known by participants with a higher number of publications (p<0.001), with more high-impact publications (p=0.005) and with recent publications (p<0.001). Awareness of predatory journals did not correlate with gender (p=0.515) or translation of scientific literature into clinical practice (p=0.543). Conclusions: The problematic topic of 'predatory journals' is still unknown by a considerable amount of oncologist, although the survey was taken in a cohort of oncologists with scientific experience. Dedicated educational initiatives are needed to raise awareness of this problem and to aid in the identification of predatory journals for the scientific oncology community.
Assuntos
Conscientização , Oncologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/ética , Revisão por Pares/normas , Adulto , Idoso , Áustria , Feminino , Alemanha , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Oncologistas/psicologia , Publicação de Acesso Aberto/normas , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/ética , Estudos Prospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
The Open Access Initiative is gaining momentum due to the worldwide availability of advanced digital tools, online publishing platforms, and systems for tracking academic contributions. Several declarations and initiatives, including Plan S, have already laid a foundation for moving away from subscription to full and immediate open-access publishing. The global initiatives imply targeting journals satisfying the upgraded quality and visibility criteria. To meet these criteria, a comprehensive approach to Open Access is recommended. This article overviews the essential components of the comprehensive approach, increasing transparency, adherence to ethical standards, and diversification of evaluation metrics. With the increasing volume of quality open-access journals, their indexing with free databases and search engines is becoming increasingly important. The Directory of Open Access Journals and PubMed Central currently free searches of open-access sources. These services, however, cannot fully satisfy the increasing demands of the users, and attempts are underway to upgrade the indexing and archiving of open-access sources in China, Japan, Korea, Russia, and elsewhere. The wide use of identifiers is essential for transparency of scholarly communications. Peer reviewers are now offered credits from Publons. These credits are transferrable to their Open Researcher and Contributor iDs. Various social media channels are increasingly used by scholars to comment on articles. All these comments are tracked by related metric systems, such as Altmetrics. Combined with traditional citation evaluations, the alternative metrics can help timely identify and promote publications influencing education, research, and practice.