Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 1371–1375 | Cite as

Indexing by Bibliographic Databases of Journals Published in the Developing World

  • Aamir Raoof MemonEmail author
  • Ahmed Waqas


The removal of Beall’s blog may result in increased numbers of predatory journals and their subsequent victims. Recognizing this, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) suggested criteria for identifying predatory journals in a statement issued on February 18, 2017. These criteria may be helpful in the current scenario of scientific publishing. However, a few lapses and limitations need to be taken into account when translating these policies to the situation in developing countries. This letter presents several cases of legitimate journals and platforms from the developing world that may be erroneously categorized as predatory according to the WAME criteria. We also suggest some improvements in these journals’ policies.


Indexing and abstracting Journalism Predatory Research ethics 



We thank K. Shashok (AuthorAID in the Eastern Mediterranean) for improving the use of English in the manuscript.


There was no funding source for this research.

Author Contribution

Both the authors contributed equally to all the aspects of this manuscript and take the responsibility of it.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors do not have any potential conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. Abbott, J. H. (2017). How to choose where to publish your work. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 47(1), 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aggarwal, R., Gogtay, N., Kumar, R., & Sahni, P. (2016). The revised guidelines of the Medical Council of India for academic promotions: Need for a rethink. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine, 7(1), 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark, J., & Smith, R. (2015). Firm action needed on predatory journals. BMJ, 350, h210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dadkhah, M., & Bianciardi, G. (2016). Ranking predatory journals: Solve the problem instead of removing it! Advanced Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 6(1), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dadkhah, M., Borchardt, G., & Maliszewski, T. (2017). Fraud in academic publishing: Researchers under cyber-attacks. American Journal of Medicine, 130(1), 27–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ebrahimzadeh, M. H. (2016). Validated measures of publication quality: Guide for novice researchers to choose an appropriate journal for paper submission. Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery, 4(2), 94–96.Google Scholar
  7. Laine, C., & Winker, M. A. (2017). Identifying predatory or pseudo-journals. World Association of Medical Editors. Accessed on 20 Feb 2017.
  8. Memon, A. R. (2017). Beall’s list has vanished: What next? Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 47(3), 222–223.Google Scholar
  9. Ravindran, V., Misra, D. P., & Negi, V. S. (2017). Letter to the editor: Predatory practices and how to circumvent them: A viewpoint from India. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32(1), 160–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Scholarly Open Access. (2017). Misleading metrics. Accessed on 19 Feb 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation SciencesPeoples University of Medical and Health Sciences for WomenNawabshahPakistan
  2. 2.CMH Lahore Medical College and Institute of DentistryLahore CanttPakistan

Personalised recommendations