Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC.
Maine Desk LLC, Portland, ME.
Nurs Outlook. 2018 Jan-Feb;66(1):4-10. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2017.05.005. Epub 2017 May 25.
Predatory journals exist in nursing and lack the safeguards of traditional publishing practices.
To examine the quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals.
Randomly selected articles (n = 358) were reviewed for structural content and eight quality indicators.
Two-thirds (67.4%) of the articles were published between 2014 and 2016, demonstrating the acceleration of publications in predatory nursing journals. The majority (75.9%) of the articles were research reports. Most followed the IMRAD presentation of a research report but contained errors, or the study was not pertinent to the nursing discipline.
Nursing research published in predatory journals may appear legitimate by conforming to an expected structure. However, a lack of quality is apparent, representing inadequate peer review and editorial processes. Poor quality research erodes the scholarly nursing literature.
掠夺性期刊存在于护理学领域，缺乏传统出版实践的保障。
检查发表在掠夺性护理期刊上的文章的质量。
随机选择了 358 篇文章，对其结构内容和八项质量指标进行了审查。
三分之二（67.4%）的文章发表于 2014 年至 2016 年，表明掠夺性护理期刊上的出版物呈加速增长趋势。大多数（75.9%）文章是研究报告。大多数研究报告都遵循了 IMRAD 对研究报告的介绍，但存在错误，或者研究与护理学科不相关。
发表在掠夺性期刊上的护理研究通过符合预期的结构可能看起来是合法的。然而，质量明显不足，这代表了同行评审和编辑过程的不足。研究质量差会侵蚀有价值的护理文献。
