Cargando…

Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a Delphi survey informing a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. DESIGN: This is a modified three-round Delphi survey delivered online for the first two rounds and in-person for the third round. Questions encompassed three themes: (1) predatory journal def...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cukier, Samantha, Lalu, Manoj, Bryson, Gregory L, Cobey, Kelly D, Grudniewicz, Agnes, Moher, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041864
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035561
_version_ 1783501747546750976
author Cukier, Samantha
Lalu, Manoj
Bryson, Gregory L
Cobey, Kelly D
Grudniewicz, Agnes
Moher, David
author_facet Cukier, Samantha
Lalu, Manoj
Bryson, Gregory L
Cobey, Kelly D
Grudniewicz, Agnes
Moher, David
author_sort Cukier, Samantha
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To conduct a Delphi survey informing a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. DESIGN: This is a modified three-round Delphi survey delivered online for the first two rounds and in-person for the third round. Questions encompassed three themes: (1) predatory journal definition; (2) educational outreach and policy initiatives on predatory publishing; and (3) developing technological solutions to stop submissions to predatory journals and other low-quality journals. PARTICIPANTS: Through snowball and purposive sampling of targeted experts, we identified 45 noted experts in predatory journals and journalology. The international group included funders, academics and representatives of academic institutions, librarians and information scientists, policy makers, journal editors, publishers, researchers involved in studying predatory journals and legitimate journals, and patient partners. In addition, 198 authors of articles discussing predatory journals were invited to participate in round 1. RESULTS: A total of 115 individuals (107 in round 1 and 45 in rounds 2 and 3) completed the survey on predatory journals and publishers. We reached consensus on 18 items out of a total of 33 to be included in a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. We came to consensus on educational outreach and policy initiatives on which to focus, including the development of a single checklist to detect predatory journals and publishers, and public funding to support research in this general area. We identified technological solutions to address the problem: a ‘one-stop-shop’ website to consolidate information on the topic and a ‘predatory journal research observatory’ to identify ongoing research and analysis about predatory journals/publishers. CONCLUSIONS: In bringing together an international group of diverse stakeholders, we were able to use a modified Delphi process to inform the development of a definition of predatory journals and publishers. This definition will help institutions, funders and other stakeholders generate practical guidance on avoiding predatory journals and publishers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7045268
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70452682020-03-09 Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process Cukier, Samantha Lalu, Manoj Bryson, Gregory L Cobey, Kelly D Grudniewicz, Agnes Moher, David BMJ Open Epidemiology OBJECTIVE: To conduct a Delphi survey informing a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. DESIGN: This is a modified three-round Delphi survey delivered online for the first two rounds and in-person for the third round. Questions encompassed three themes: (1) predatory journal definition; (2) educational outreach and policy initiatives on predatory publishing; and (3) developing technological solutions to stop submissions to predatory journals and other low-quality journals. PARTICIPANTS: Through snowball and purposive sampling of targeted experts, we identified 45 noted experts in predatory journals and journalology. The international group included funders, academics and representatives of academic institutions, librarians and information scientists, policy makers, journal editors, publishers, researchers involved in studying predatory journals and legitimate journals, and patient partners. In addition, 198 authors of articles discussing predatory journals were invited to participate in round 1. RESULTS: A total of 115 individuals (107 in round 1 and 45 in rounds 2 and 3) completed the survey on predatory journals and publishers. We reached consensus on 18 items out of a total of 33 to be included in a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. We came to consensus on educational outreach and policy initiatives on which to focus, including the development of a single checklist to detect predatory journals and publishers, and public funding to support research in this general area. We identified technological solutions to address the problem: a ‘one-stop-shop’ website to consolidate information on the topic and a ‘predatory journal research observatory’ to identify ongoing research and analysis about predatory journals/publishers. CONCLUSIONS: In bringing together an international group of diverse stakeholders, we were able to use a modified Delphi process to inform the development of a definition of predatory journals and publishers. This definition will help institutions, funders and other stakeholders generate practical guidance on avoiding predatory journals and publishers. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7045268/ /pubmed/32041864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035561 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Epidemiology
Cukier, Samantha
Lalu, Manoj
Bryson, Gregory L
Cobey, Kelly D
Grudniewicz, Agnes
Moher, David
Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title_full Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title_fullStr Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title_full_unstemmed Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title_short Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process
title_sort defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified delphi consensus process
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041864
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035561
work_keys_str_mv AT cukiersamantha definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess
AT lalumanoj definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess
AT brysongregoryl definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess
AT cobeykellyd definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess
AT grudniewiczagnes definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess
AT moherdavid definingpredatoryjournalsandrespondingtothethreattheyposeamodifieddelphiconsensusprocess