The companies publishing predatory journals are an emerging problem in the area of scientific literature as they only seek to drain money from authors without providing any customer service for the authors or their readership. These predatory journals try to attract new submissions by aggressive email advertising and high acceptance rates. But in turn, they do not provide proper peer review, and therefore, the scientific quality of submitted articles is questionable. This is important because more and more people, including patients, are reading such journals and rely on the information they provide. Consequently, predatory journals are a serious threat to the integrity of medical science, and it is crucial for scientists, physicians and even patients to be aware of this problem. In this review, we briefly summarize the history of the open access movement, as well as the rise of and roles played by predatory journals. In conclusion, young and inexperienced authors publishing in a predatory journal must be aware of the damage of their reputation, of inadequate peer review processes and that unprofitable journals might get closed and all published articles in that journal might be lost.

Post-treatment data indicated no significant change in collaboration, communication, role clarity, or trust, concern, and individuality behaviors. The conclusions drawn were that the organization development strategies had little impact on improving organizational effectiveness. The fact that none of the hypotheses were supported does not mean that OD has no value for professional schools, but may be due to the inadequacy of the instruments used. It was further suggested that the time actually spent on intervention may have been too short and the intervention too mild to effect a change in the numerous dependent variables of the research. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks to my family, friends, and colleagues who gave me the love, emotional support, and pragmatic suggestions I needed to accomplish this task. My appreciation and thanks are also g~ven to Jerry Lansdowne for believing in me, and to my Committee members for "sticking with me" through the process. Special appreciation goes to Nancy Chapman for her helpful comments and assistance, and for the many hours she spent critically reviewing this dissertation. I also appreciate the helpful suggestions from Carol Lindeman and Bill Boore.

Physicians are divided about whether to report patients who have committed insurance fraud. Their decisions to report insurance fraud are influenced by their attitudes and demographic features, as well as by patient factors.

No abstract

No abstract