Academics are encouraged to stop submitting their papers to & # 39; robbery news & # 39; motivated by money because of the fear of damaging the reputation of scientists
- Three large organizations of medical writers said that scientists should be vigilant
- Poorly run journals can damage the reputation by publishing poor quality work
- People with non-original names or poor websites can be cause for concern
Scientific journals that do not properly review articles before they are published are damaging the industry's reputation, experts warn.
The & # 39; predatory magazines & # 39; are accused of having dangerously low standards and publishing papers just to make money.
Although they did not mention the magazines, the scientists mentioned red flags that should deter researchers from using certain publications.
Those who have almost identical names for respected magazines, those with shabby websites or with dubious contact information should be avoided, they said.
The damning remark was published by experts from the American Medical Writers Association, the European Medical Writers Association and the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals.
Scientists have been warned not to send their work to poor quality magazines in an attempt to be published. Experts say that non-standard publications damage the reputation of people who work in the field (stock image)
Researchers may be tempted to submit to less prestigious journals so that they can say they have been published, but the organizations must avoid this.
& # 39; The conscious and deliberate submission of manuscripts to robber magazines is not ethical & # 39 ;, the organizations said.
& # 39; Medical writers and editors, as well as researchers, are responsible for evaluating the integrity, history, practices and reputation of the journals to which their research is submitted.
& # 39; Legitimate research conducted with the best of intentions can be lost.
RESEARCHERS REQUEST RETRACTION OF STUDIES DONE ON & # 39; HARVESTED & # 39; ORGANS
According to experts from Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, more than 400 scientific studies should be withdrawn because they may be based on organs collected from dead prisoners in China.
It is thought that transplantation tests were performed on hearts, livers or lungs taken by executed criminals and political prisoners who died in the Asian nation.
China is believed to have the highest rate of execution in the world, and until 2015 prisoners in death row were routinely used as a source of organ donation against their will.
But experts say that studying these parts of the body is unethical and that articles that do not indicate where organs come from should be withdrawn.
The researchers were concerned about 445 articles that were published in English-language journals.
The studies between 2000 and 2017 related to data from 85,477 organ transplants in China.
But the vast majority did not report whether the tissues were taken from executed prisoners (92.5 percent) or whether donors had given their consent (99 percent).
Professor Wendy Rogers, lead author of the study, said the findings & # 39; are morally worrying & # 39; were reported, the British Medical Journal reported.
She added that scientists and editors of magazines and publishers have demonstrated a significant lack of vigilance and non-compliance with accepted ethical standards.
& # 39; There are also dangers for authors because their reputation may be compromised by their work being published in predator magazines or becoming unconscious & # 39; appointed & # 39; in their editors.
& # 39; In addition, authors may get stuck after submitting an article to a predatory magazine.
& # 39; There is a potential risk that some magazines will not return submitted manuscripts or publish a submitted paper, even after an author has protested. & # 39;
The team published their & # 39; joint position statement on predatory publishing & # 39; in the magazine Current medical research and opinion.
Scientific journals work with a peer-review system in which the work of academics is read by other experts in the field to decide how well the research has been done.
Studies that have been poorly performed or results that have been misinterpreted by scientists can be rejected and not published.
& # 39; Predatory & # 39; journals that do not suffer from a rigorous peer review system may eventually publish inaccurate or poor quality research.
The organizations said in their main article that the magazines deliberately misrepresented and ultimately only hurt the industry.
They admitted that a large increase in the number of magazines over the past 15 years had made it harder to determine which magazines were respectable.
Those who recruit aggressive researchers & # 39; were among the perpetrators, they said, as well as those who had a & # 39; unrealistically fast & # 39; assessment, with a lack of transparent prices, claims of unusually wide coverage or from companies with a large number of new journals.
Dr. Robert Matheis, of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP), added: & # 39; Professional medical communicators and publication planners must be aware of the serious threat posed by predatory publications in the scientific literature.
& # 39; ISMPP's participation in this joint position statement is part of our commitment to inform our members about predatory publishing and how this important issue can be addressed. & # 39;
. (TagsToTranslate) Dailymail (t) health