An Assessment of Predatory Publication Use in Reviews

被引:10
作者
Collom, Charles D. [1 ]
Oermann, Marilyn H. [2 ]
Sabol, Valerie K. [3 ]
Heintz, Phyllis A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Calif State Univ Bakersfield, Bakersfield, CA USA
[2] Duke Univ, Sch Nursing, Nursing, Durham, NC USA
[3] Duke Univ, Sch Nursing, DUMC 3322,307 Trent Dr, Durham, NC 27710 USA
关键词
citations; evidence-based practice; nursing literature; predatory journals; reviews; systematic reviews; JOURNALS;
D O I
10.1097/NUR.0000000000000530
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Purpose/Aims Predatory journals, characterized by poor editorial practices and questionable peer review, constitute a threat to academic literature. Citations to predatory journals in reviews of research potentially weaken the strength of these reviews, which are relied upon by nurses as evidence for practice. The purposes of this study were to assess the (a) extent to which reviews have relied on articles published in predatory journals, (b) nursing research practice areas most reliant on predatory journal citations, and (c) extent to which predatory journal citations are being used in reviews that guide the care of sensitive or vulnerable groups. Methods Literature and other types of reviews with 1 or more citations to a predatory journal (n = 78) were assessed. The reviews were classified by topic (clinical practice, education, and management). Results The 78 reviews contained 275 citations to articles published in predatory journals; 51 reviews (65%) substantively used these references. Conclusions Predatory journal articles, which may not have been subjected to an adequate peer review, are being cited in review articles published in legitimate nursing journals, weakening the strength of these reviews as evidence for practice.
引用
收藏
页码:152 / 156
页数:5
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   What does better peer review look like? Underlying principles and recommendations for better practice [J].
Allen, Heidi ;
Cury, Alexandra ;
Gaston, Thomas ;
Graf, Chris ;
Wakley, Hannah ;
Willis, Michael .
LEARNED PUBLISHING, 2019, 32 (02) :163-175
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2017, ELSEVIER SCOPUS CONT
[3]  
Beall J., 2010, CHARLESTON ADVISOR, V10, P10, DOI DOI 10.5260/CHARA.12.1.50
[4]   What I learned from predatory publishers [J].
Beall, Jeffrey .
BIOCHEMIA MEDICA, 2017, 27 (02) :273-278
[5]  
Cobey Kelly D, 2018, F1000Res, V7, P1001, DOI 10.12688/f1000research.15256.2
[6]   Avoiding predatory journals: Quick peer review processes too good to be true [J].
Edie, Alison H. ;
Conklin, Jamie L. .
NURSING FORUM, 2019, 54 (03) :336-339
[7]   Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers [J].
Frandsen, Tove Faber .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2017, 113 (03) :1513-1528
[8]  
Gopalakrishnan S, 2013, J Family Med Prim Care, V2, P9, DOI 10.4103/2249-4863.109934
[9]   A Workshop for Addressing the Impact of the Imposter Syndrome on Clinical Nurse Specialists [J].
Haney, Tina Sweeney ;
Birkholz, Lorri ;
Rutledge, Carolyn .
CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST, 2018, 32 (04) :189-194
[10]   Characteristics of E-Mail Solicitations From Predatory Nursing Journals and Publishers [J].
Lewinski, Allison A. ;
Oermann, Marilyn H. .
JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN NURSING, 2018, 49 (04) :171-177