Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Ibnosina Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences 2020; 12(01): 23-32
DOI: 10.4103/ijmbs.ijmbs_25_20
Original Article

A bibliometric analysis of the international medical literature on predatory publishing

Anas Beshyah
1   Department of Medicine, Dubai Medical College, Dubai
,
Momna Basher
1   Department of Medicine, Dubai Medical College, Dubai
,
Salem Beshyah
1   Department of Medicine, Dubai Medical College, Dubai
2   Department of Endocrinology, Mediclinic Airport Road Hospital, Abu dhabi
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Introduction: Predatory journals threaten the quality, honesty, and credibility of published scholarly work. This study aimed to provide a quantitative overview of the issues of predatory publishing and journals in international literature. Materials and Methods: We searched the Scopus database for “predatory journalism and publishing” in the abstract, keywords, and title between 2012 and 2018. The Scopus tools were used online for calculations, and VOSviewer was used to construct the visualization maps. Documents were analyzed for bibliographic and citation characteristics such as publication years, languages, countries or regions, journals, articles, and authors. Results: Four hundred and eleven articles were retrieved; 31.3% were “open access;” 46.0% were original research articles. Medical journals were of varying impact. Authors from the USA and affiliated institutions were the most dominant. One author has a clearly evident dedication to the subject being the first to coin the term “predatory” journals. Visualization maps showed sparse associations between most prolific authors, journals, and institutions. Conclusions: This study is the first bibliometric analysis of the threat of predatory journalism to medical research. Increasing anxiety is evident with an uncoordinated strive to fight it. The study represents a starting point to identify and quantify the gaps in the field. It should help pinpoint possible directions and potential collaborations for future action.

Key-words:

Bibliometric analysis - citation analysis - health journals - predatory journals - predatory publishing - research ethics

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.




Publication History

Received: 25 February 2020

Accepted: 26 March 2020

Article published online:
07 July 2022

© 2020. The Libyan Authority of Scientific Research and Technologyand the Libyan Biotechnology Research Center. All rights reserved. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License,permitting copying and reproductionso long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, oradapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Beall J. Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature 2012;489:179.
  • 2 Beshyah SA. Predatory publishing: A wake-up call for editors and authors in the Middle East and Africa. Ibnosina J Med Biomed Sci 2017;9:123-5.
  • 3 Beshyah SA, Hajjaji IM, Elbarsha A. Awareness of predatory journals among physicians from Africa and the Middle East: An exploratory survey. Ibnosina J Med Biomed Sci 2018;10:136-40.
  • 4 Ellegaard O, Wallin JA. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics 2015;105:1809-31.
  • 5 Al-Busaidi IS, Abdulhadi NN, Coppell KJ. Diabetic foot disease research in gulf cooperation council countries: A bibliometric analysis. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J 2018;18:e338-43.
  • 6 Beshyah WS, Beshyah SA. Bibliometric analysis of the literature on Ramadan fasting and diabetes in the past three decades (1989-2018). Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2019;151:313-22.
  • 7 Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:16569-72.
  • 8 van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010;84:523-38.
  • 9 Shen C, Björk BC. 'Predatory' open access: A longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Med 2015;13:230.
  • 10 Clark J, Smith R. Firm action needed on predatory journals. BMJ 2015;350:h210.
  • 11 Xia J, Harmon JL, Connolly KG, Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard HA. Who publishes in “predatory” journals? J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 2015;66:1406-17.
  • 12 Beall J. Medical publishing triage – Chronicling predatory open access publishers. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2013;2:47-9.
  • 13 Sorokowski P, Kulczycki E, Sorokowska A, Pisanski K. Predatory journals recruit fake editor. Nature 2017;543:481-3.
  • 14 Shamseer L, Moher D, Maduekwe O, Turner L, Barbour V, Burch R, et al. Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: Can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison. BMC Med 2017;15:28.
  • 15 Beall J. What I learned from predatory publishers. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2017;27:273-8.
  • 16 Berger M, Cirasella J. Beyond Beall's list: Better understanding predatory publishers. Coll Res Libr News 2015;76:132-5.
  • 17 Bartholomew RE. Science for sale: The rise of predatory journals. J R Soc Med 2014;107:384-5.
  • 18 Moher D, Srivastava A. You are invited to submit…. BMC Med 2015;13:180.
  • 19 Beall J. Predatory journals: Ban predators from the scientific record. Nature 2016;534:326.
  • 20 Bowman JD. Predatory publishing, questionable peer review, and fraudulent conferences. Am J Pharm Educ 2014;78:176.
  • 21 Jalalian M, Mahboobi H. Hijacked journals and predatory publishers: Is there a need to re-think how to assess the quality of academic research? Walailak Sci Technol 2014;11:389-94.
  • 22 Wicherts JM. Peer review quality and transparency of the peer-review process in open access and subscription journals. PLoS One 2016;11:e0147913.
  • 23 Beall J. Predatory publishing is just one of the consequences of gold open access. Learn Publ 2013;26:79-84.
  • 24 Beall J. Dangerous predatory publishers threaten medical research. J Korean Med Sci 2016;31:1511-3.
  • 25 Moher D, Moher E. Stop predatory publishers now: Act collaboratively. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:616-7.
  • 26 Beall J. Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2016;98:77-9.
  • 27 Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Diyanova SN, Kitas GD. Publishing ethics and predatory practices: A dilemma for all stakeholders of science communication. J Korean Med Sci 2015;30:1010-6.
  • 28 Webber NR, Wiegand S. Black & White Response in a Gray Area: Faculty and Predatory Publishing. ACRL 2019 Proceedings. Chicago, IL: American Library Association; 2019. p. 529-44.
  • 29 Cash-Gibson L, Guerra G, Salgado-de-Snyder VN. SDH-NET: A South-North-South collaboration to build sustainable research capacities on social determinants of health in low- and middle-income countries. Health Res Policy Syst 2015;13:45.
  • 30 Beshyah SA. Authors' selection of target journals and their attitudes to emerging journals: A survey from two developing regions. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J 2019;19:e51-7.