Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predatory publishing and journals: how to address a profitable and ubiquitous business

  • Letter to the editor
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Chirico F (2017) “Predatory journals” or “predatory scholars?” The essential role of the peer review process. Int J Occup Environ Med 8:186–188. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijoem.2017.1082

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Chirico F (2019) Journal of Health and Social Sciences: A reputable, DOAJ-indexed, free, open access journal. J Health Soc Sci 4(1):9–12. https://doi.org/10.19204/2019/jrln1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chirico F, Magnavita N (2019) Comments on editorial “professional medical writing support: the need of the day”. Perspect Clin Res 10(1):44–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chirico F, Teixeira da Silva JA, Magnavita N (2020) “Questionable” peer review in the publishing pandemic during the time of COVID-19: implications for policy makers and stakeholders. Croatian Med J 61(3):300–301. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2020.61.300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cobey KD, Galipeau J, Shamseer L, Moher D (2017) Assessing the utility of an institutional publications officer: a pilot assessment. PeerJ 5:e3294. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3294

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Deora H, Tripathi M, Chaurasia B, Grotenhuis JA (2020) Avoiding predatory publishing for early career neurosurgeons: what should you know before you submit? Acta Neurochir (Wien). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-020-04546-9

  7. Haug CJ (2015) Peer-review fraud- hacking the scientific publication process. New Engl J Med 373(25):2393–2395

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Magnavita N (2005) Fifty years of impact factor: lights and shadows. Med Lav 96(5):383–390

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shamseer L, Cobey KD, Moher D (2017) How stakeholders can respond to the rise of predatory journals. Nature Human Behaviour 1:852–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Teixeira da Silva JA (2020) The ICMJE recommendations: challenges in fortifying publishing integrity. Ir J Med Sci 189(4):1179–1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-020-02227-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tripathi M, Deora H, Chaurasia B, Grotenhuis JA (2020) Predatory publishing and journals: it’s ubiquitous! Acta Neurochir (Wien). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-020-04645-7

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Chirico.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chirico, F., Magnavita, N. Predatory publishing and journals: how to address a profitable and ubiquitous business. Acta Neurochir 163, 2391–2392 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-020-04684-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-020-04684-0

Navigation