Predatory publishers ensnare even Ivy League scientists

lterrat's bookmarks 2017-09-07

Summary:

"Researchers began with 3,702 articles from some 92 potentially predatory publishers, winnowing that down to the 1,907 papers that were either systematic reviews or primary biomedical studies, rather than comments or opinion pieces.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, they found that a relatively small number of those papers fully reported methods used, clinical trial registration numbers, or approvals from ethics committees. The authors recognize that these are widespread issues in more mainstream journals as well — but when they compared their numbers to previous studies of well-respected publishers, those failures were much more common among the journals on Beall’s list."

Link:

https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/06/predatory-publishers-ivy-league/

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » lterrat's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.hei oa.journals

Date tagged:

09/07/2017, 14:45

Date published:

09/07/2017, 10:45