Quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals

Oermann, Marilyn H.; Nicoll, Leslie H.; Chinn, Peggy L.; Ashton, Kathleen S.; Conklin, Jamie; Edie, Alison H.; Amarasekara, Sathya; Williams, Brittany L.

doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2017.05.005

Cited by 73 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There has been limited research addressing plagiarism in predatory journals. Several articles described unethical practices common to predatory journals, such as inadequate or no peer review of manuscripts, intentional misrepresentation or omission of information about author fees, duplicate publication, journal hijacking, and scam conferences (Jimenez & Garza, ; Oermann et al., ; Shamseer et al., ). Shamseer et al.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sometimes called scholarly open access publishing or gold open access, this model does not require a subscription or payment to access journal content (Beall, 2016a, 2016b). While not every open access journal is considered predatory, the number of predatory journals and variety of dishonest publishing practices has increased in recent years and is recognized as an urgent problem (Oermann et al., ; Yessirkepov, Nurmashev, & Anartayeva, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nurses have been among the leaders to call out unethical predatory publishing practices, both philosophically and through research (INANE Predatory Publishing Collaborative, ). During the analysis of the quality of publications in predatory journals (Oermann et al., ) it was serendipitously found that three journals seemed to have extensive amounts of plagiarized content among them. Examples included several instances of duplication of entire articles, changing only the authors, and sometimes the wording in the title.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Plagiarism in Predatory Publications: A Comparative Study of Three Nursing Journals

Owens

Nicoll

2019

J of Nursing Scholarship

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study compared three known predatory nursing journals to determine the percentage of content among them that was plagiarized or duplicated. A serendipitous finding of several instances of plagiarism via duplicate publications during the random analysis of articles in a study examining the quality of articles published in predatory journals prompted this investigation. Design The study utilized a descriptive, comparative design. All articles in each journal (n = 296 articles) from inception (volume 1, number 1) through May 1, 2017, were analyzed. Methods Each article was evaluated and scored electronically for similarity using an electronic plagiarism detection tool. Articles were then individually reviewed, and exact and near exact matches (90% or greater plagiarized content) were paired. Articles with less than 70% plagiarized scores were randomly sampled, and an in‐depth search for matches of partial content in other journals was conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Findings The extent and direction of duplication from one given journal to another was established. Changes made in subsequent publications, as a potential distraction to identify plagiarism, were also identified. There were 100 (68%) exact and near exact matches in the paired articles. The time lapse between the original and duplicate publication ranged from 0 to 63 months, with a mean of 27.2 months (SD =19.68). Authors were from 26 countries, including Africa, the United States, Turkey, and Iran. Articles with similarity scores in the range of 20% to 70% included possible similarities in content or research plagiarism, but not to the extent of the exact or near exact matches. The majority of the articles (n = 94) went from Journal A or C to Journal B, although four articles were first published in Journal B and then Journal A. Conclusions This study found a substantial level of plagiarism via duplicate publications in the three analyzed predatory journals, further diluting credible scientific literature and risking the ability to synthesize evidence accurately to inform practice. Editors should continue to use electronic plagiarism detection tools. Education about publishing misconduct for editors and authors is a high priority. Clinical Relevance Both contributors and consumers of nursing literature rely on integrity in publication. Authors expect appropriate credit for their scholarly contributions without unethical and unauthorized duplication of their work. Readers expect current information from original authors, upon which they can make informed practice decisions.

show abstract

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Plagiarism in Predatory Publications: A Comparative Study of Three Nursing Journals

Owens

Nicoll

2019

J of Nursing Scholarship

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A second study by Oermann and colleagues examined the quality of manuscripts from predatory journals (Oermann et al, ). Almost all (97%) of the studies were evaluated as poor or average.…”

Section: Implications For Nursingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predatory publishing and cybercrime targeting academics

Umlauf

Mochizuki

2018

Int J of Nursing Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this report is to inform and warn academics about practices used by cybercriminals who seek to profit from unwary scholars and undermine the industry of science.This report describes the signs, symptoms, characteristics, and consequences of predatory publishing and related forms of consumer fraud. Methods to curb these cybercrimes include educating scholars and students about tactics used by predatory publishers; institutional changes in how faculty are evaluated using publications; soliciting cooperation from the industries that support academic publishing and indexing to curb incorporation of illegitimate journals; and taking an offensive position by reporting these consumer fraud crimes to the authorities. Over and above the problem of publishing good science in fraudulent journals, disseminating and citing poor-quality research threaten the credibility of science and of nursing.

show abstract

“…In our decades of experience, neither of these things is true. Authors do not follow guidelines: most submissions are either somehow substantially incomplete or out of the journal's scope (Oermann et al., ). At the Journal of Advanced Nursing ( JAN )—the highest cited academic nursing journal in the world and one of the longest established—approximately 50% of submissions are rejected by the Editor‐in‐Chief and many on the grounds of not following the guidelines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%