Abstract
Abstract
Background
Academic publishing is a cornerstone of scholarly communications, yet is unfortunately open to abuse, having given rise to ‘predatory publishers’– groups that employ aggressive marketing tactics, are deficient in methods and ethics, and bypass peer review. Preventing these predatory publishers from infiltrating scholarly activity is of high importance, and students must be trained in this area to increase awareness and reduce use. The scope of this issue in the context of medical students remains unknown, and therefore this sought to examine the breadth of the current literature base.
Methods
A rapid scoping review was undertaken, adhering to adapted PRISMA guidelines. Six databases (ASSIA, EBSCO, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) were systematically searched for content related to predatory publishing and medical students. Results were single-screened, facilitated by online reviewing software. Resultant data were narratively described, with common themes identified.
Results
After searching and screening, five studies were included, representing a total of 1338 students. Two predominant themes– understanding, and utilisation– of predatory publishers was identified. These themes revealed that medical students were broadly unaware of the issue of predatory publishing, and that a small number have already, or would consider, using their services.
Conclusion
There remains a lack of understanding of the threat that predatory publishers pose amongst medical students. Future research and education in this domain will be required to focus on informing medical students on the issue, and the implication of engaging with predatory publishers.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference74 articles.
1. Tennant JP. The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2018;365:fny204.
2. Niles MT, Schimanski LA, McKiernan EC, Alperin JP. Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0228914.
3. Beall J. Dangerous Predatory Publishers Threaten Medical Research. J Korean Med Sci. 2016;31:1511–3.
4. Grudniewicz A, Moher D, Cobey KD, Bryson GL, Cukier S, Allen K, et al. Predatory journals: no definition, no defence. Nature. 2019;576:210–2.
5. Boukacem-Zeghmouri C, Pergola L, Castaneda H. Profiles, motives and experiences of authors publishing in predatory journals: OMICS as a case study. 2023.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献