Cargando…

Understanding of medical students about predatory journals: A comparative study from KSA and New Zealand

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the extent of understanding of medical students from KSA and New Zealand (NZ) about predatory journals. METHODS: From March to July 2019, self-administered questionnaires were sent to fourth- and fifth-year students of two medical schools in KSA and NZ. Between-group c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alamri, Yassar, Al-Busaidi, Ibrahim S., Bintalib, Marwah G., Abu-Zaid, Ahmed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taibah University 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7564899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33132804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.07.010
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: This study examines the extent of understanding of medical students from KSA and New Zealand (NZ) about predatory journals. METHODS: From March to July 2019, self-administered questionnaires were sent to fourth- and fifth-year students of two medical schools in KSA and NZ. Between-group comparisons were carried out using the two-sided Student's t test and the Chi-square test. Statistical significance was determined at a p-value <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 263 students completed the questionnaire (response rate: 59.1 percent KSA; 31 percent NZ). Prior research experience was significantly higher among KSA students (56.6 percent) as compared to NZ students (32.3 percent; p = 0.0006). A significantly higher number of KSA students (75.6 percent) felt that they were under pressure to publish studies during their term at medical school as compared to only 12.3 percent of NZ medical students (p < 0.0001). While one-third of the students in both countries were familiar with ‘open-access publishing’ (30.8 percent KSA versus 42.2 percent NZ), only a few displayed awareness about ‘predatory journals’ (9.1 percent KSA versus 7.8 percent NZ; p = 0.7) or ‘Beall's list’ (2.5 percent KSA versus 0 percent NZ; p = 0.02). A small number of students from both countries had published in predatory journals (26.1 percent [n = 6/23] KSA versus 12.5 percent [n = 1/8] NZ, p = 0.4). A few students had received warnings or advice regarding predatory journals (4.5 percent KSA versus 1.5 percent NZ; p = 0.2). A majority of respondents from both the countries found it hard to identify predatory journals. CONCLUSION: This study identified that the understanding and knowledge of medical students regarding predatory journals is rather poor. This indicates that curricular, extracurricular, and institutional measures to promote awareness about predatory journals are warranted.