Klyce Walter, Feller Edward
hird-year medical student at the Alpert Medical School of Brown University.
clinical professor of medical sciences at Brown University.
R I Med J (2013). 2017 Jul 5;100(7):27-29.
A new danger threatens the integrity of scholarly publishing: predatory journals. Internet-only, "open-access" publishing is a valid way for researchers to reach the public without a paywall separating them. But, of thousands of open-access scientific journals today, as many as twenty-five percent are believed to be fake, existing only to make money by charging authors high processing fees. In sham journals, peer review is cursory or absent: as many as eighty to ninety percent of submitted manuscripts are accepted, many within days, without any editorial comment. Predatory journalism can be remarkably good at mimicking reputable publishers. Sham journals use names and logos that closely resemble those of legitimate journals, intentionally confusing site visitors. Untrustworthy publications have not received the widespread, damning publicity they deserve. If junk science is not confronted and eliminated, it will continue to tarnish and undermine ethical, open-access scholarly publishing. [Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2017-07.asp].
掠夺性期刊。仅通过网络的“开放获取”出版是研究人员在没有付费墙阻隔的情况下向公众传播成果的一种有效方式。但是,在如今数以千计的开放获取科学期刊中,据信多达25%是虚假的,其存在仅仅是为了通过向作者收取高额处理费来赚钱。在虚假期刊中,同行评审敷衍了事或根本不存在:多达80%至90%的投稿稿件被接受,许多在数天内就被录用,且没有任何编辑评论。掠夺性期刊非常善于模仿声誉良好的出版商。虚假期刊使用的名称和标识与正规期刊极为相似,故意误导网站访问者。不可信的出版物尚未得到应有的广泛而严厉的曝光。如果垃圾科学不被抵制和消除,它将继续损害和破坏道德的、开放获取的学术出版。[全文可在http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2017-07.asp获取]