We all get them, some of us more than 10 a day, emails from journals suggesting we publish in their august pages. More often than not, these emails are not sent from Nature or the New England Journal of Medicine, but they seem eager to publish our research. How can we be certain that these are quality publications and not some scam? In the current publishing environment, with the revolution/evolution in on-line publishing offering so many new titles, how do we recognise which are reputable and will be well-received, ensuring that our work stands the test of time.
To achieve the best dissemination of our research efforts many of us seek to publish in Open Access journals - in fact many funding bodies demand that your work is only published in open access journals. Like subscription journals, open access journals run the gamut from reputable and well-regarded to little-known and menial. But, as open access publishers ask authors (or their institutions) to pay article processing charges to make the work open to all readers, the latter group of journals (little-known and sloppy) have the opportunity to make a good deal of money from authors. That opportunity is even bigger in the case of online-only journals. As observed, these journals (or the people behind them) actively solicit manuscripts, often through aggressive and misleading email campaigns, and lack transparency regarding their editorial processes. They do not adhere to established academic standards, posing risks to the credibility of scientific research. Researchers who unknowingly publish in such journals may harm their reputations and face difficulties in having their work recognized by reputable academic circles.
Enter Jeffrey Beall (academic librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver), hero of the hour, who observed that there is a group of open access publishers who can be considered less interested in your science than your money. The term he gave to this behaviour was 'predatory' and in response to the growing number of dubiously titled journals he created an online list of 'predatory publishers.' It seems that identifying predatory journals can be challenging, but they often exhibit red flags such as unrealistic promises of rapid publication, lack of credible editorial boards, or unclear peer-review processes. Many authors found it helpful to check his list before submitting an article to an open access journal. The blog, maintained since 2008, was taken down earlier this month. The reason for removal of the site is unclear but there have been rumours that threats and politics forced Beall to shut down the site.
Which journals should you consider submitting your articles to in the post-Beall universe? We provide some guidance n approaches to selecting your journal for publication in our latest Insider's Insight [1]. You can also find guidance within the literature itself, some articles are even open access [2]. Where Beall’s list was a blacklist there are white lists widely available. These lists identify journals and publishers that follow established, recognised standards in open access publishing — for example the Directory of Open Access Journals (www.doaj.org) or the membership list for the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (www.oaspa.org/membership/members). If a journal is listed in the DOAJ, or the publisher is a member of OASPA, authors can be assured that the journal to which they’re submitting follows responsible publishing practices. However, these are not independent voices — "choose well young Skywalker".
The clinical stage biotechnology company developing breakthrough therapies for patients suffering with cancer,
The UK's world-class human challenge study gives us new information about SARS-CoV-2 cases that were mild in 36 healthy.
Have you seen our latest Insider's Insight on Case Reports? Once a staple of medical journals,
I have never been great at conferences. People don’t believe me but I am painfully shy and far too worried about what.
Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trials (IITs) are clinical studies led by academic researchers or clinicians
Advisory board meetings are often used to address perceived knowledge gaps and build consensus.
Concerns about readiness of the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) Clinical Trials Information System persist as the.
We all need heroes - people who can champion our cause - helping the world to understand our rationale
Every year, a huge amount of scientific data is released. It's out there, but how do you find it?
The largest pharmaceutical companies not surprisingly rely on the largest contract research organizations
Experience at Niche has taught us that clinical study protocols are born in the white-hot fire
Did you miss our Insider's Insight into understanding the complex world of bibliometrics [1]?
Searching the literature can take various forms, ranging from a quick scan of recent publications
ive years ago I was lucky enough to be involved in a project that resulted in publications
In the past, Halloween has meant the end of the crop and the start of the dark, cold winter.
Our team are exploring different and novel ways for young people to enter the pharmaceutical industry.
We recently encouraged writers (of all kinds) in our recent Insider’s Insight to experiment with large language.
The proceedings of the Association for Human Pharmacology in the Pharmaceutical Industry (AHPPI)
Welcome to the seventh issue of the Refractory Asthma Stratification Programme (RASP-UK) newsletter
Investigator sites are very important to clinical studies because they make sure that new drugs are safe and work well.
Get our latest news and publications
Sign up to our news letterResources
Social
Contact us
Address
Niche Science & Technology
Unit 26 Falstaff House
Bardolph Road
Richmond TW9 2LH
United Kingdom
