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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |