medical research archives predatory journal

Polite invitation turns out to be fraudulent

For the second time I received a nice email from “Dr. Kateryna Bielka, M.D”. She says complementary things about one of my published papers and, in a highly personalised manner, asks if I would consider publishing in an esteemed journal that she is working for. Like many academics my email in box is peppered with highly standardised invitations to publish in open access journals. Most are clever enough to parse one of my article titles into the email text they send out but this invitation appears much more human. And the journal in question is called Medical Research Archives

However, human it isn’t. In fact it is the second one I have received from this ‘person’. When you search for the name of the journal and couple it with ‘predatory open access’ you get a very informative account from the Scholarly Open Access blog at. https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/08/04/about-those-manipulative-spam-emails-from-internal-medicine-review/

You learn that the journal in question will charge between $1250 and $3000 to place your work, that it is closed access, and that the journal appears to have no subscribers at all. Not a very attractive proposition.

108 thoughts on “ Polite invitation turns out to be fraudulent ”

2018-06-25 Today, I have received similar invitation in connection with my already published paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2017.07.008 from the same person: https://journals.ke-i.org/index.php/mra/Dr-Kateryna-Bielka , and for the second time. I don’t think the above paper could be suitable for the Medical Research Archives either regarding the paper’s content, or my financial situation. 😉

The name has now changed from “Dr. Kateryna Bielka, M.D” to “A. Phiri, M.D”. Medical Research Archives

now it’s L. Smith, M.D. @mail.mrajournal.org

Agree, I received the same name. thanks for the reminder

My dear teacher, Mr. Dr. Smith, I am very happy that my article received your attention, I will be more happy to prepare an article about the topic you are pursuing, thank you.

I got the same letter from L. Smith, M.D. @mail.mrajournal.org

I received a similar email from L. Smith [email protected] , who was supposed to with the European Society of Medicine. I checked their name is the on website, but red flag was the address in Geneva, Switzerland which turned out negative. Another red flag was their second address in Covina, California, a vacant small office. The final red flag was their requirement for me to pay thousands of dollars to submit a publication or pay the member ship fee. Only to receive a follow-up email that they would reduce the fee. THIS IS A SCAME DO NOT FALL FOR IT. MORE INFORMATION AT https://it.brown.edu/phish-bowl-alerts/mra-editorial-board-european-society-medicine

Same for me!

Look below! The entire mail:

I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “XXX YYY ZZZ.”

Would that be you? I was wondering if you are still working in this field as it aligns well with one of the theme issues I am planning for this year. Perhaps you could tell me more about your work in this area.

Could you please get in touch with me so we may discuss this?

Best Regards,

L. Smith, M.D.

Medical Research Archives(MRAJ)

Phone: +1.612.524.5565

Online ISSN: 23751924

Print ISSN: 23751916

PubMed ID: 101668511

Notice: This message and all attachments are only to be used by the person or business to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error or do not wish to receive further emails from this sender please notify us by replying to this message, or via mail at 340 S. Lemon Ave Walnut California ZIP Code 91789- USA. If you are not the named addressee you should not read, share, or copy this message.

Yes I got it too, same name and twice

The same thing happened to me, I was reading this thread and a few days later I got one from L. Smith, M.D. It looked like it might be real so I responded to inquire and I got a response that they wanted me to submit a paper, same scam different journal name.

Truly annoying, got sent this twice

Dear xxxxx,

Thank you for your email. I think your work with biomarkers would make an interesting addition to the theme issue.

I was hoping, in light of your work in this area, you could consider preparing an article for our upcoming issue. The theme issue will include a variety of research articles, reviews, and case reports.

We are hoping to have all the submissions for the issue in by early October, but it shouldn’t be a problem to extend the deadline to a couple of weeks if needed.

Would you mind telling me more about the article you have in mind?

L. Smith Chair of Editorial Committee Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine Online ISSN: 2375-1924 Print ISSN: 2375-1916 View on PubMed

Same here, I almost believed them for a second 🙂

I have received the same invitation from L. Smith … 🙁

I received from L.Smith today for European Society of Medicine

thank you for sharng. I got it from this name.

thank you for sharing. I got it from this name.

I got the same from L. Smith, M.D more than twice within 7 days

same thing happened on me :((

I received such a mail from L.Smith, MD on april 04 2020

L. Smith, M.D wrote mi twice this week

The smae to me

I received two mails from L. Smith as well this week

me here…..receive L. Smith request twice this week, for a paper in the agriculture field to be published in a MD journal……hmmm

I don’t recall getting the first one. But L. Smith MD states that they sent me an earlier email, mentioned one of my publications (also not relevant for a medical journal) and tells me that my research aligns with one of their them issues. I was going to reply just out of courtesy. But now, I will block.

This exactly happened to me. I checked the mentioned date for the claimed email (earlier one), and I had not such an email in my inbox. But it was interesting to see that on the top of the claimed first email (that was brought in the below section of the text) the sent time was Wednesday, June 4, 2020; however, I remembered that June 4, 2020, was Thursday and not Wednesday. This was a hint for me to google it and now finding out that it is spam and fraudulent.

Same e-mail, received twice on April 7 and again on April 16. Thanks for sharing the information about the matter. [email protected] Alex

M.D. L. Smith keeps on sending me emails for contribution to a special issue about COVID-19 of their MDA journal. He quotes a paper by me that has, however, absolutely nothing to do with any medical research. Very annoying. Especially the fact that it looks like a real person trying hard to get in touch with me. Fortunately websites such as this one exist for a check on predators…

Same name L. Smith for mee

I also got a friendly spam email from L. Smith, M.D. from Medical Research Archives(MRAJ).

There just seemed to be something not authentic about L. Smith MD which made me pause. Thank God I did. Thanks for this site.

Yep. Repeat opinion re L. SMITH M.D. Been getting them for quite some time. Title of article/area of research he/his is interested in an accepting work changed with a new area of research Ive moved into…

Just received a polite attempt to contact the corresponding author of a paper of mine that is not related to the medical field at all–the second one, after I ignored a first.

Me too!! Every day

I received the same email by L. Smith, but when i reply him, my message is blocked. Thats why I reached here,, while searching his real email. LOL..

Same here. Got same email

Thank you for your post. I have received too the email from L. Smith M.D., Medical Advanced Research Journal.

Received a polite email about a paper of mine, and when I answered that I was not working anymore in that field, he replied:

“Thank you for your email. I understand. Could you possibly recommend anyone who may be able to help? Maybe you could also tell me more about your current research, and I could see if it is a fit for one of our other issues.”

After reading here, I’ll ignore

I have also got one: Dear xxx, I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “xxxx ” Would that be you? I was wondering if you are still working in this field as it aligns well with one of the theme issues I am planning for this year. Perhaps you could tell me more about your work in this area.

L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ) Phone: +1.612.524.5565 Online ISSN: 23751924 Print ISSN: 23751916 PubMed ID: 101668511

Got exactly the same email from L. Smith, MD.

Dear Dr. xxxx

I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “………………………………………(my paper title)”

Exactly the same email from L. Smith, M.D., I received as below:

Dear Dr. xxxx I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “……(my paper title)” Would that be you? I was wondering if you are still working in this field as it aligns well with one of the theme issues I am planning for this year. Perhaps you could tell me more about your work in this area. Could you please get in touch with me so we may discuss this?

I’ve got a same deceitful invitation too from L.Smith MD.

I received two mails with the same fake invitation from L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ)

It is fraudolent journal, I suppose

I’ve also received two emails from L. Smith M.D., Medical Advanced Research Journal, in the last week.

I just received this mail:

Dear Dr. XXX, I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “XXXXX”. Would that be you? I was wondering if you are still working in this field as it aligns well with one of the theme issues I am planning for this year. Perhaps you could tell me more about your work in this area.

I have the same story to share…. ;(

I have received a similar message from L. Smith MD states that he asked me if I continue to make a research similar to one of my publications that are not sutable for a medical journal. One of my colleague told me that this person is a dangeorus person it should be blocked beacuse he try to enter all of the news account n°, or card VISA, etc. But now, I will block him.

I got one as well as below,

Dear Dr. Xxxxxxx I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “Xxxxxxxxxxxx”

June 2020 and “L. Smith M.D.” is still active at MRAJ.

Ainda bem que achei essa página, porque estava achando que era verdade! Também recebi um e.mail do L. Smith, MD para publicar um artigo. Obrigada pelos relatos e alerta!

1st June 2020 and L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ) with the following email: [email protected]

Just received a polite request from this same L. Smith, M.D. few minutes ago.

Today, I also relieved the same email regarding one of my published papers. thanks for your reminder

Today i have received similar invitation Thanks for yours comments

Same here. Got two emails from L. Smith MD,

From: L. Smith, M.D. Sent: xxxx, June xx, 2020 To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Subject: Re: idea

I am still trying to get in touch with the corresponding author of “Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx”. If you could please put me in contact with them it would be much appreciated.

Are you still conducting research in this area?

I also received the same fraudulent mail, and from the first time I was worried and suspecting something wrong.now I feel confident to reject such fake mail

Teo emails attached. The second One made me feel guilty for having ignorare the First One. Then i look for the journal on the web and round this blog…. Thanks for posting.

I am still trying to get in touch with the corresponding author of “Gene-environment interactions and vitamin D effects on cardiovascular risk.”. If you could please put me in contact with them it would be much appreciated.

From: L. Smith, M.D. Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2020 To: [email protected] Subject: idea

Dear Dr. Iaccarino,

I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “Gene-environment interactions and vitamin D effects on cardiovascular risk.”

Thank God. I also got it. Luckily find out this page while searching about the journal…

Same e-mail from L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ) Thanks for this post

I also got the same email. The entire email is below. Why people do such cheap activities. I replied him that you are fake.

Dear Dr. ……., I am hoping to contact the corresponding author of “Microbiological Induced Calcium Carbonate Process to Enhance the Properties of Cement Mortar”

Best Regards, L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ) Phone: +1.612.524.5565 Online ISSN: 23751924 Print ISSN: 23751916 PubMed ID: 101668511

Thanks for posting: the person is still active, now under new e-mail address.

Sane letters here from “L. Smith” in late June of 2020. The publication the fake doctor supposedly read involved medical scams. How’s that for irony?

“Should say “same” instead of “sane.”

The dear docter is still slightly changing his line of attack, but with the same credentials:

“Dear Dr. YY X, I was hoping to get your assistance with a special theme issue I am organizing for later this year. I very much enjoyed reading “xxxx” and am wondering what your current projects are.

Would you be willing to take a look at the details of the issue and offer your advice on topics which would be important to include?

Best Regards, L. Smith, M.D.

Medical Research Archives(MRAJ) Phone: +1.612-524-5565 Online ISSN: 23751924 Print ISSN: 23751916 PubMed ID: 101668511″

I just received a similar email from L Smith, MD (August 1,2020). Thanks for the warning!

I got one aswell, Did anyone respond? I am tempted by using an intermediate email to let them know that I am willing to help if they transfer some bitcoins first…..

Again, I received an honorable request from L. Smith, M.D. (Medical Research Archives) to help create a special theme issue for next year.

“Dear X X, I was hoping to get your assistance with a special theme issue I am organizing for next year. I very much enjoyed reading “Low maternal melatonin level increases autism spectrum disorder risk in children” and am wondering what your current projects are. Would you be willing to take a look at the details of the issue and offer your advice on topics which would be important to include? Best Regards, L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives(MRAJ)”

Publication fee $ 3100. Publications are not found in PubMed. I will therefore not accept this request.

I got the same email from M. smith today

I got three emails from L. Smith, MD in the last ten days. E.g.

Dear Dr. XXX, I am helping to organize a theme issue on Trends in Immunology to be published this year, and I was hoping to talk to you about your research in this area. I found your article “XXX” (titles of two of my articles) quite interesting. Would you be open to the idea of preparing an article to be featured in the theme issue?

Sincerely, L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine Online ISSN: 2375-1924 Print ISSN: 2375-1916 PubMed ID: 101668511

I just received a similar email from L. Smith:

Dear Dr. xxxxxxx,

I am helping to organize a theme issue on Trends in Neurology to be published this year, and I was hoping to talk to you about your research in this area. I found your article “xxxxxxxxx” (title of my article) quite interesting.

Would you be open to the idea of preparing an article to be featured in the theme issue?

L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine Online ISSN: 2375-1924 Print ISSN: 2375-1916 PubMed ID: 101668511

Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. Every time you don’t print an email, you are helping the environment. This email a B2B communication. If you have received this email in error or would like to remove your data from our system please reply, or contact us at Rue le Corbusier 12 Geneva, 1208, Switzerland.

Clearly a predatory publication.

It continues, even for pharmacists…

One of your articles caught my interest recently and I thought I might get in contact with you. It was your article “…”. I am serving as the editor of a special issue on Advancements in Hepatology and I am wondering if you would be interested in composing something to be included in the issue.

Might this be possible?

It is good that I found this site as I received a few days ago a very kind and “personalized” mail from L Smith MD.

Nurses are not immune

L. Smith, M.D. Sat, 24 Jul at 01:13

Dear Dr. Stephen McKeever,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your Cardiology research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on The Future of Cardiology which will be released by the European Society of Medicine at the end of this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Impact of congenital heart disease on siblings: A review” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

This could be in the form of a research article or even a review article.

Might this be a possibility?

Dear Dr. Rustika Nur Istiqomah,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine next year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Hatenography On Twitter During the Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia: Hate Speech Case Against Anies Baswedan” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your pharmacology research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in Pharmacology which will be released by the European Society of Medicine at the beginning of next year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Epitaxy of the bound water phase on hydrophilic surfaces of biopolymers as key mechanism of microwave radiation effects on living objects” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

I also got 2 e-mails within a week from L. Smith.

Here is the 1st e-mail:

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 To: XXX Subject: pharmacology research?

Dear Dr. XXX, If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your pharmacology research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in Pharmacology which will be released by the European Society of Medicine at the end of this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “XXX” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

This could be in the form of a research article or even a review article. Might this be a possibility?

An here is the 2nd e-mail 4 days later – 29.10.2021:

“I hope your week is going well. I am trying to finalize the plan for the special issue on Pharmacology and was wondering if you had a chance to think about contributing an article?

Sincerely, L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine”

Same here. I received two emails from [email protected] .

Thankfully I visited here…It looked so authentic that I took a pause to give it a thought.

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine early next year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “. ” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

This could be in the form of a research article or even a review article. 

Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. Every time you don’t print an email, you are helping the environment. This email a B2B communication. If you have received this email in error or would like to remove your data from our system please reply, or contact us at Rue le

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine early next year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Mucormycosis and COVID-19 an epidemic in a pandemic?” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

Dear Dr. Abhishek Shukla,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine next year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of popular YouTube videos as an alternative health information platform” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

Yes, I have received several emails with same type of invitation. Usually I never attend or answer these kind of invitations. I recommend the other friends and researchers to do the same.

I am receiving the same email continously from one month but fortunately it is in my habit to go through the website or google it for complete information. First it is Mr. Osman and now some L. Smith can into action.

Dear Dr. Markam,

Thank you for your email. The journal is the Medical Research Archives. The Medical Research Archives (MRAJ) was founded in 2014 as a subscription journal published both online and in print. We have since converted to open access, but are unique in that we still maintain the print edition. The theme issue will include a variety of research articles, reviews, and case reports. Please find more information at https://journals.ke-i.org/mra

Could you tell me more about your current research?

I am so glad I read this thread – get a lot of these but it looked more real that others…PS: I am a nurse researcher and only half way to a doctorate!!

Dear Dr. Charlotte Gordon, If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Use of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

Indeed, “L. Smith” was a suspicious name, so I looked it up and thankfully found this page. Another giveaway that’s harder to spot: the follow up email cited https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/author-guideline yet the email came from esmed.net.

The full email is below:

Dear Dr. Alex Bäcker,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “The Social Antagonist Hypothesis: COVID-19 Case Growth Speed Increases With Number of Social Contacts with People Over 65 years old, but Decreases with Contact with Others. Evidence Against “Senior Hours” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

Please do not print this email unless it is absolutely necessary. Every time you don’t print an email, you are helping the environment. This email a commercial B2B communication. If you have received this email in error or would like to remove your data from our system please reply, or contact us at Rue le Corbusier 12 Geneva, 1208, Switzerland, or 340 S Lemon Ave #7750, Walnut CA 91789. Copyright 2022 all rights reserved.

THE PERSON (DR. L: SMITH) IS STILL RATHER PROLIFIC….

MRA Editorial Board Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:03 AM Reply-To: MRA Editorial Board To: Prof Ugo Rovigatti

Dear Dr. Prof Ugo Rovigatti,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “If Not Now, When ? — Chlroroquine/Hydroxychloroquine dosage for COVID-19 should be clarified especially in view of higher mortality in the elderly.” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

The same name looks similar bogus Russell 2022 Dear If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “Embitterment: The Nature of the Construct and Critical Issues in the Light of COVID-19” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

Dear Dr. Umarudin,

If you have a few minutes I wanted to discuss your COVID-19 research. I am serving as the editor of a special theme issue on Advancements in COVID-19 which will be released by the European Society of Medicine this year and I was thinking that something related to your work on “xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx” would be interesting to include in the issue. Perhaps you could tell me more about your research in this area.

I also recieved and email from MRA Editorial Board

Dear Dr. XXXXX YYYY,

I wanted to get in contact with you regarding your Neurology research. I am helping to assemble a special theme issue on The Future of Neurology which will be published by the European Society of Medicine later this year. I thought that it might be interesting to include an article related to your work on “XXXXXX YYYYYY ZZZZZ” in the theme issue. It would be great if you could tell me more about your work on this.

Could we discuss this idea?

Dear Dr. xxxxx,

Thank you for your response. I spoke with our board at length regarding your previous email and they have agreed to substantially reduce the publication fees to $380. Is there any way this could work for you?

18 July 2022: L. Smith, M.D.” <[email protected]

Dear Dr. XXX,

I'm hoping we can have a discussion about your ALS research. I am helping to plan a special theme issue on Trends & Innovations in ALS which will be published by the European Society of Medicine later this year. I thought that it would be interesting to include a new article related to your work on "XXX " in the theme issue. It would be great if you could tell me more about your work in this area.

Would you be open to this idea?

Neurology Editorial Committee Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine ISSN: 2375-1924

I received about 15 emails from L. Smith – quite annoyed that I have not “registered” and paid the fee yet – which he reduced for me too.

I sent his email to the European Society of Medicine since he is using their URL except with a .net instead of .org

I also received two emails from them, but neither was signed. Thank you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear Dr. XXXX

I’m hoping we can discuss your psychology research. Recently I enjoyed reading your article “XXXXXXX” and I thought it would be interesting to include a new article on this topic in a special theme issue titled New Insights & Perspectives in Psychology, which will be published by the European Society of Medicine next year. Perhaps you could tell me more about any further work you have done on this topic.

Psychology Editorial Committee Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine ISSN: 2375-1924

I’m hoping we can discuss your MS research. Recently I enjoyed reading your article “XXX” and I thought it would be interesting to include a new article on this topic in a special theme issue titled New Insights & Perspectives in Multiple Sclerosis, which will be published by the European Society of Medicine next year. Perhaps you could tell me more about any further work you have done on this topic.

I received about 36 emails from L. Smith – quite annoyed that I have “registered” and not paid the fee yet – which he reduced for me too.

I want to add to this thread that about two weeks ago I received my first solicitation from L. Smith. I became suspicious after seeing some of the fees then tracking down the journal’s home page. Thank you all for the many warnings posted here. I have not deleted all of the L. Smith emails and will certainly not be paying a “publication” fee.

I received a similar invitation to contribute an article From: Oncology Editorial Committee on: Friday, July 22, 2022 10:45 AM and from [email protected] on August 6, 2022. The latter was electronically signed by L. Smith, M.D. Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine Online ISSN: 2375-1924 Print ISSN: 2375-1916 View on PubMed I ended up falling into this trap and sent a manuscript on February 15, 2023 to L. Smith’s e-mail address [[email protected]]. He gave the option to send it directly to him or to submit it through the portal of Medical Research Archives. Since he did not respond, I followed up with another message the next day (February 16, 2022), again attaching the manuscript, and got no response. Yesterday, February 17, I sent this message: Dr. Smith, I have now become aware of numerous allegations of lack of legitimacy of invitations made by Dr. L. Smith to contribute an article for publication in a special issue of Medical Research Journals – just as the invitation you sent me. Therefore, I urge you not to publish or otherwise use any parts of the manuscript I e-mailed you on February 15 and again on February 16. I am NOT giving you authorization to publish my manuscript and I request that you delete the Word and pdf versions of the manuscript immediately.

Unless you acknowledge receipt of this message within the next 48 hours with the statement that you will NOT publish or use any parts of my manuscript in any publication, and that you have deleted the Word and pdf files of the manuscript that I emailed directly to you, I will proceed to contact the University’s legal department and proceed accordingly under their advice.

I have not received any response yet. Any suggestions will be appreciated.

I received a similar email from Cardiology Editorial Committee written in a very personalised manner. The content is quoted below.

” I wanted to get in touch with you about your atherosclerosis work. I enjoyed your article “A Thickness Sensitive Vessel Extraction Framework for Retinal and Conjunctival Vascular Tortuosity Analysis” and was wondering what further research you have done on this topic. This year I am helping to create a special theme issue titled New Perspectives on Atherosclerosis which will be published in the official journal of the European Society of Medicine. Your work could be a valuable addition to the theme issue and I hope you would be willing to discuss the possibility of preparing an article.

Is this something you might consider?

Section editor Cardiology Editorial Committee Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine ISSN: 2375-1924 NLM (PubMed): 101668511 “

Yes, L.smiths is still out there to contact people. Quoted below:

Dear Dr. Schlosser,

Could you please get in touch with me regarding the manuscript you were planning on submitting for the theme issue? There are other authors who would like your space if you’re not going to use it and we need to know how to proceed.

On Jul 15, 2023 11:29 AM, agent wrote: Dear Dr. Karoly Schlosser,

Could you please get in touch with me regarding the manuscript you were planning on submitting for the theme issue?

On Jul 11, 2023 10:30 AM, agent wrote: Dear Dr. Karoly Schlosser,

Do you have a brief abstract or summary of the manuscript we discussed that you could share with me?

On Jul 07, 2023 09:23 AM, agent wrote: Dear Dr. Karoly Schlosser,

I hope all is well. A few weeks ago, we were in contact regarding a potential collaboration with our journal, is now a better time to discuss this further?

On Jun 21, 2023 15:54 PM, K Schlosser wrote: Dear L Smith,

I am waiting to hear back on senior colleagues’ advice.

Just to note, I am not Laura Bettinol, she was a co-author.

Regards, Karoly Schlosser

I got same worded polite email from L. Smith June 20th 2023.

I got s L. Smith polite worded similar email June 20th 2023.

I got L. Smith polite worded similar email June 20th 2023. So he is still in this fraudulent business. The journal does exist.

I also received an invitation from “L. Smith” to submit a manuscript to Medical Research Archives. After two mails, L. Smith still signed without disclosing his/her first name, which is very unusual in science. Having read enough about fraudulent journals, I googled for “L. Smith Medical Research Archives” and found this page. Bingo! I will politely decline the honorable invitation!

As of August 11,2023 L. Smith M. D is still in action trying to scam people. Thanks to this page, I was able to awaken.

It is still continuing – see my correspondence below

Dear Dr. Maggs,

Thank you for your email. I understand. Could you possibly recommend anyone who may be able to help?

On Oct 11, 2023 12:15 PM, agent wrote: Dear Dr. Christine,

On Oct 11, 2023 12:14 PM, Christine A Maggs wrote: Dear no name! No, I am not in a position to do this. Thanks for the invitation Christine

On 11 Oct 2023, at 13:01, Endocrinology Editorial Committee wrote:

Re: Profiling the activity of edible European macroalgae towards pharmacological targets for type 2 diabetes mellitus Have you thought about the possibility of writing something for the Diabetes theme issue? I would be happy to answer any questions.

Section Editor Endocrinology Editorial Committee Medical Research Archives European Society of Medicine ISSN: 2375-1924 NLM (PubMed) ID: 101668511

I received the following letter from the “Rheumatology Editorial Committee”

I hope this email reaches you in good health. When you have some time I’m hoping we can discuss your systemic lupus erythematosus work as I think your input could be valuable for a project we’re working on. I am helping to plan a special theme issue on systemic lupus erythematosus to be published this year in the official journal of the European Society of Medicine. The issue will highlight recent developments in systemic lupus erythematosus and feature a variety of types of articles. Your paper from a while ago “N-sided radial Schramm-Loewner evolution” was of particular interest to me and I thought perhaps you might consider preparing a new article to be part of the theme issue. I would be interested to learn about any further research you have done in this area.

—————

I am a mathematician who studies SLE (Schramm-Loewner evolution), which is a model from probability and statistical physics. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with SLE (systemic lupus erythematosus ). After not responding I got a follow-up email asking again so I responded to that asking who the scientific advisor for the issue is. That is when I got a response from “L. Smith” who claimed to be on the editorial committee. I next requested a CV from L. Smith and then heard no response.

Because I got the same email from [email protected]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Quick Links

Support our mission by becoming a member

Public Health Policy Center

Explore the society's public health initiatives

Meet the community

See what our members have been working on

Journal Homepage

Latest issue, past issues, theme issues, top articles, how to submit, article types, style & format, copyright policies, indexing & impact.

An evidence-based approach to spotting a predatory journal

Unfortunately no comprehensive list exists which lists all quality journals or those to avoid. But evaluating an unfamiliar journal can be an easy process if you know what to look for. Here are ten things to keep in mind when considering submitting an article to a new journal:

• Verify indexing claims . Many predatory journals claim to be indexed in places where they are not. Don’t just take their word for it, check for yourself if the journal actually has articles indexed in the indices listed on their website. It is easy to do a search by journal name on most indexing platforms. Below are some example for our journal, the Medical Research Archives:
• Google Scholar
• scienceopen
• Check previous issues of the journal . Any legitimate journal should have an archive of past issues which adhere to a regular publication schedule. If a journal has gaps in its publication history or claims to have been in publication for years but only has issues going back a few months that could be a red flag. An example of an archive of past issues for our journal may be found here .
• Watch out for surprise fees . Many legitimate journals charge authors a fee to cover publication costs. But if the fees are not clearly listed on their website or the journal waits until after a acceptance of an article to mention that a fee needs to be paid then it is definitely not a journal you want to be associated with. Information about a journal’s fees should be transparent and easy to find like this .
• Double check Impact Factors . An Impact Factor (IF) is not a perfect measure of a journal’s quality. There are many good journals which don’t have an IF, and many bad journals which do. However be alert for journals which falsely claim to have an IF when they do not, or use their own made up metric which is not verifiable. As always, this information should be clearly stated on the journal’s website like this .
• Read several articles published in the journal . Look for signs of adequate copyediting and formatting, proper use of the English language, and references to support the authors’ claims.
• Beware of unjust retraction or withdrawal policies . No legitimate journal charges a fee to retract or make a correction to a published article, or refuses to withdraw an article which is pending publication until the author pays a fee. The journal’s website should state their policies for retractions like this .
• Check copyright transfer policies . Most quality open-access journals use a Creative Commons License rather than asking authors to sign over their copyrights to the journal. A journal’s copyright policies should be readily available on their website .
• Does the journal have an ISSN and DOIs? All legitimate journals have an ISSN and assign a digital object identifier (DOI) to each of their articles to ensure long-term access even if the website or publisher changes.
• Is the editorial board real? Some dishonest journals list editorial board members who never agreed to serve on their board. If you aren’t sure you can always contact some of the listed board members to verify that they are actually affiliated with the journal. A legitimate editorial board should include biographies or at least affiliations of the board members.
• Who is the publisher? A journal doesn’t have to be published by a large international publisher like Elsevier or Wiley to be legitimate. But a lack of any information about the publisher of the journal could be a red flag. It’s worth checking before submitting an article to a journal. Our journal, for example, is published by the European Society of Medicine .

Information

Online ISSN: 2375-1924 Print ISSN: 2375-1916 PubMed ID: 101668511

© 2024 European Society of Medicine. All rights reserved.

Call for papers

Have a manuscript to publish in the society's journal?

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs
• News & Views
• How to avoid being...

How to avoid being duped by predatory journals

• Related content
• Peer review
• eva.amsen{at}gmail.com

Some journals capitalise on researchers’ and clinicians’ need for publications by luring them in with flattering emails, only to subject them to poor editing practices and threatening invoices. The best way to avoid this is to learn to spot the warning signs, writes Eva Amsen

There are tens of thousands of academic journals, with new ones appearing all the time, creating a complicated landscape of many potential homes for every article. “Unfortunately, because it’s so big and confusing, predatory journals have taken advantage of this system,” says Dominic Mitchell, operations manager at the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and current chair of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, a trade association of open access journal and book publishers.

“A predatory publication is one that is deceptive in some way; where the publishers are not transparent about what they’re doing,” explains Katherine Stephan, research support librarian at Liverpool John Moores University.

In 2019 a US court ordered OMICS Publishing Group to pay $50.1m to the Federal Trade Commission for misleading researchers. 1 The court found that OMICS engaged in numerous deceptive practices. Often authors were not told about publishing fees until after their articles were accepted. Those who then asked for their articles to be withdrawn were frequently refused.

And this is just the tip of an iceberg of bad publishing practices. Keeping track of the deception is difficult—partly because there is no hard line between what’s considered predatory and what’s not. But publishing experts are trying to make sense of it and help researchers make informed choices.

A spectrum of bad practices

In 2019 an international panel of publishers, librarians, researchers, and others agreed a general definition of predatory publishing: “Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritise self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterised by false or misleading information, deviation from …

Log in using your username and password

BMA Member Log In

If you have a subscription to The BMJ, log in:

• Need to activate
• Log in via institution
• Log in via OpenAthens

Log in through your institution

Subscribe from £184 *.

Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.

* For online subscription

Access this article for 1 day for: £50 / $60/ €56 ( excludes VAT )

You can download a PDF version for your personal record.

Buy this article

The problem of predatory journals

The number of illegitimate journals is exploding — and they could hurt your career. here’s how to avoid falling prey..

Authors’ contributions

DM and LS conceived of this project and drafted the protocol, with revisions by VB. RB, JC, JG, OM, DM, JR, LS, BJS, and LT were involved in the conduct of this project. LS and LT performed analysis of data. LS drafted the manuscript. All authors provided feedback on this manuscript and approved the final version for publication.

Competing interests

VB is the Chair of COPE and the Executive Director of the Australasian Open Access Strategy Group.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Transparency declaration.

David Moher affirms that this manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported, that no important aspects of the study have been omitted, and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, K1H 8L6, Canada

Larissa Shamseer, David Moher & James Galipeau

School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventative Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, K1H 8M5, Canada

Larissa Shamseer & David Moher

School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 7BL, UK

Onyi Maduekwe

Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, K1H 8L6, Canada

Lucy Turner

Office of Research Ethics and Integrity, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia

Virginia Barbour

Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, 02115, USA

Rebecca Burch

icddr,b, Dhaka, 1000, Bangladesh

Jocalyn Clark

Origin Editorial, Plymouth, MA, 02360, USA

Jason Roberts

Knowledge Synthesis Group, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, K1H 8L6, Canada

Beverley J. Shea

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larissa Shamseer .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Maduekwe, O. et al. Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison. BMC Med 15 , 28 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9

Download citation

Received : 11 November 2016

Accepted : 09 January 2017

Published : 16 March 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Scientific publishing
• Publishing models
• Biomedical journal
• Journalology

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

• General enquiries: [email protected]

June 1, 2022

Predatory Journals That Publish Shoddy Research Put People’s Lives at Risk

Doctors may accept spurious claims about medical treatments, and invalid studies wrongly influence public policy

By Naomi Oreskes

In the past year there's been a lot of talk about the lack of trust in science and the need to distinguish legitimate research from misinformation, disinformation, and other forms of fallaciousness. But how? Many commentators have pointed to the importance of peer review—the process through which scientific claims are scrutinized for validity by other researchers with expertise in relevant fields, before the papers are published. Those observers have insisted that a study's appearance in a peer-reviewed journal is a hallmark of legitimacy. Although that type of publication does not guarantee that a study is correct, it does indicate that its methods and conclusions have been vetted by appropriate experts. At least, that is the theory.

A recent development, however, threatens to undermine this criterion for distinguishing scientific sense from nonsense. It is the rise of “predatory journals.” These journals pretend to uphold scientific standards but do not. Typically they offer authors rapid publication, in part because they do not take the time to do high-quality peer reviews. Nor do they vet papers for plagiarism, faulty methods, conflicts of interest or missing ethics board approvals. Still, these journals make plenty of profits, collecting millions of dollars in fees from authors.

This is a big problem for society, not just for science. One study concluded that 8,000 predatory journals collectively publish 420,000 papers every year, nearly a fifth of the scientific community's annual output of 2.5 million papers . A medical news story on Medscape noted that dubious research funded by commercial interests can bypass proper vetting via publication in a predatory journal. These papers are listed in scientific databases alongside legitimate journals, making it difficult for researchers and policy makers to discern the difference.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

At best, this is a giant waste of resources. At worst, it may put people's lives at risk because doctors and patients may wrongly accept spurious claims about medical treatments, supplements and inadequately tested drugs—and invalid studies wrongly influence public policy. And the danger is getting bigger: more of these predators are cropping up every year.

Why do scientists publish in these journals? One answer is money (or rather the lack of it). Prestigious scientific journals charge their authors for publishing, stating the costs cover careful editing and review. These “page” fees can amount to thousands of dollars. Well-funded academics charge these fees to outside grants, or wealthy institutions may cover a researcher's costs. In contrast, the typical fee in a predatory journal is less than $200 , which helps to explain why the authors of papers in these journals are disproportionately located in less wealthy countries and institutions.

Another reason is visibility : predatory journals offer more opportunities for scholars to get their work published and cited, which helps them get jobs and grants. This reflects the perverse incentives of the “publish or perish” practices of science. It's no secret that researchers are often judged more by the quantity of their output than its quality. Universities place emphasis on metrics such as the numbers of published papers and citations when they make hiring, tenure and promotion decisions.

To warn scholars away from predatory journals, librarian Jeffrey Beall developed a list of them in 2008. But his approach was criticized as subjective and even defamatory . Other lists have also been subject to dispute , in part because there was no agreement on precisely how to define predation.

Recently, after much debate, some researchers have reached a consensus definition; it includes presenting false and misleading information, among other features . As a result, scientists may now be able to make more useful lists. That is well and good, but it addresses the symptoms more than the disease.

To put an end to predatory practices, universities and other research institutions need to find ways to correct the incentives that lead scholars to prioritize publication quantity in the first place. Setting a maximum limit on the number of articles that hiring or funding committees can consider might help, for instance, as could placing less importance on the number of citations an author gets. After all, the purpose of science is not merely to produce papers. It is to produce papers that tell us something truthful and meaningful about the world.

Beall's List

of Potential Predatory Journals and Publishers

​Potential predatory scholarly open‑access publishers

Instructions : first, find the journal’s publisher – it is usually written at the bottom of the journal’s webpage or in the “About” section. Then simply enter the publisher’s name or its URL in the search box above. If the journal does not have a publisher use the  Standalone Journals  list. All journals published by a predatory publisher are potentially predatory unless stated otherwise.

Excluded – decide after reading

• Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)  – I decided not to include MDPI on the list itself. However, I would urge anyone that wants to publish with this publisher to thoroughly  read this wiki article detailing their possible ethical/publishing problems, and a recent article discussing their growth.

Useful pages

​List of journals falsely claiming to be indexed by DOAJ

DOAJ: Journals added and removed

Nonrecommended medical periodicals

Retraction Watch

Flaky Academic Journals Blog

List of scholarly publishing stings​

Conferences

Questionable conferences [ archive ]

How to avoid predatory conferences

Flaky Academic Conferences Blog

Evaluating journals

Journal Evaluation Tool

JCR Master Journal List

DOAJ Journal Search

Think Check Submit

Original description by J. Beall

This is a list of questionable, scholarly open-access publishers. We recommend that scholars read the available reviews, assessments and descriptions provided here, and then decide for themselves whether they want to submit articles, serve as editors or on editorial boards. In a few cases, non-open access publishers whose practices match those of predatory publishers have been added to the list as well. The criteria for determining predatory publishers are  here .​ We hope that tenure and promotion committees can also decide for themselves how importantly or not to rate articles published in these journals in the context of their own institutional standards and/or geocultural locus.  We emphasize that journal publishers and journals change in their business and editorial practices over time. This list is kept up-to-date to the best extent possible but may not reflect sudden, unreported, or unknown enhancements.

St. Petersburg University Press (UDB-SPU)

Scholarly journals from st. petersburg university on a wide range of topics.

The St. Petersburg University Press (UDB-SPU) collection offers online access to scholarly and scientific works published in the renowned Vestnik SpbU , a journal of science and theory that features educational and scientific literature on social and natural sciences, engineering and technology. Established in 1946, St. Petersburg University Press publishes innovative theoretical, experimental, and practical research, as well as reports on the achievements of the University’s research institutes and schools. The editorial board of Vestnik SpbU is drawn from prominent academic researchers with leading works in the sciences, humanities, and social sciences.

• Archive: 2013-present
• Language: Russian; English abstracts
• City: St. Petersburg
• Country: Russia
• Frequency: Quarterly
• Updates: Continuous
• Format: PDF, article-based
• Producer: East View Information Services
• Platform: East View Universal Database

UDB-SPU Titles

The St. Petersburg University Press (UDB-SPU) collection includes 17 Series with an archive going back to 2013. All articles are presented in the original PDF format in Russian, with abstracts in English.

Series 1. Mathematics. Mechanics. Astronomy Series 2. History Series 3. Biology Series 4. Physics. Chemistry Series 5. Economy Series 6. Political Science. International Relations Series 7. Geology. Geography Series 8. Management Series 9. Phylology. Oriental Studies. Journalism Series 10. Applied Mathematics. Information Science. Management Processes Series 11. Medicine Series 12. Sociology Series 13. Oriental and African Studies Series 14. Law Series 15. Art Studies Series 16. Psychology. Pedagogy Series 17. Philosophy. Conflict Studies. Cultural Studies. Religion Studies

Related Resources

East view’s universal database™ platform.

As the largest provider of authoritative information on Russia and the former Soviet Union, East View offers an innovative approach to electronic research. We maintain redundant hosted environments for this content in Minneapolis and Moscow on our Universal Database™ platform (UDB).

Customize and Optimize Your Library

• Build collections from individual online titles
• Link options for Online Public Access
• IP/password access to standard or custom collections
• Stable URLs for linking on a database level or on individual title and article levels
• Mirror servers in U.S. and Russia
• Usage reports in COUNTER format

Increase Your Efficiency

• Interface functions are optimized for specific content types
• Browse by specific title and issue
• Mobile friendly access
• Easily exportable citations
• Transliteration, Russian, Ukrainian or English language searches
• Virtual Russian and Ukrainian keyboard displays available for ease of input

* UDB and Universal Database are international trademarks of East View Information Services, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Interested in more information?

• Institution *
• Phone Number *
• State, Country *
• Resource or Service * Resource or Service e-Collections Newspapers Journals Books & eBooks Maps & Atlases Standards Approval Plans Digitization Services Document Delivery Library Services Research Translation
• Resource of Interest
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.74(4); 2020 Aug

Predatory Open Access Journals are Indexed in Reputable Databases: a Revisiting Issue or an Unsolved Problem

Nguyen minh duc.

1 Doctoral Program, Department of Radiology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam

2 Department of Radiology, Pham Ngoc Thach University of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

3 Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital 02, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Dang Vinh Hiep

4 Department of Family medicine, Pham Ngoc Thach University of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Pham Minh Thong

5 Department of Radiology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam

Lejla Zunic

6 Department of Biochemistry and Pharmacology, Former Editor-in-Chief of Acta Informatica Medica Journal, University of Zenica, Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Muharem Zildzic

7 Department of Internal Medicine, Academician, Co-Editor of Medical Archives Journal, University of Zenica, Zenica , Bosnia and Herzegovina

Doncho Donev

8 Department of Social Medicine, Academician, Editor-in-Chief of Materia-Socio-Medica Journal, University of Skopje, North Macedonia

Slobodan M. Jankovic

9 Department of Pharmacology, Academician, Statistical Editor of Medical Archives Journal, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia

10 Department of Internal Medicine, Academician, Former Editor-in-Chief of Medical Archives Journal, University of Split, Split, Croatia

11 Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Academician, Editor-in-Chief of Medical Archives Journal, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Introduction:

Pseudo journals, hijacked journals, fraudulent journals, fake journals, and predatory journals waste valuable research when authors publish their studies in them.

This article described novel suggested features for the identification of fraudulent journals and aimed to explain this issue to help inexperienced scientists avoid publishing in predatory journals.

The articles related to this topic in were retrieved from PubMed and trustable Internet sources.

Unfortunately, some fake journals have made their way into reputable databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science; thus, the serious question has been raised regarding how we should address this problematic phenomenon. We recommended 28 suggested characteristics of predatory journals for readers to take into consideration.

Conclusion:

Unaware of the detrimental effects associated with publishing in disreputable journals, inexperienced researchers can fall victim to them. Together, as both readers and writers, we should completely boycott predatory journals.

1. INTRODUCTION

Today, the emergence of fraudulent scientific journals (called “predatory journals”) represents one of the greatest threats to science ( 1 - 3 ). Many scientists, especially in developing countries, have fallen victim to predatory journals. Often, predatory journals protect themselves from being labeled as fraudulent journals and shield themselves from credible indexing or classification by various respectable organizations and governing bodies, facilitating their continued ability to prey on the science world ( 4 ). The majority of fraudulent journals are likely to be administered by a single person from a single computer. Such journals deliver bulk spam invitations to all writers, inviting the submission of publications for which they seek article processing charges (APCs) and specifically guarantee the approval and publication of manuscripts, without requiring the rigorous peer review procedures that are normally adopted by reputable, indexed journals, thus, jeopardizing the validity of biomedical research on behalf of reputable, indexed journals ( 5 , 6 ).

Predatory journals employ many strategies and techniques to appear respectable and draw the interest of young, naive researchers who would are eager to publish quickly, to achieve promotion. This practice of enticing researchers to publish valid work in predatory journals not only results in the tremendous loss of funds and precious resources but can also result in the loss of significant, validated studies that may have contributed breakthroughs to medical science progress. Most young and novice researchers, in addition to some respectable researchers, actively publish in fraudulent or fake journals, to develop their resumes and curriculum vitae, increasing their numbers of publications to obtain jobs, finance additional studies, and qualify for grants and promotions in academic careers ( 7 - 11 ).

It would be important to note that there were 81 Vietnamese authors who published their papers in a fake journal in 2019 ( 11 ). For instance, with the new regulations from government accompanied by the pressure of “publish or perish”, professorship achievement, and career advancement, it is observed that some Vietnamese radiological researchers published papers in predatory journals ( 7 - 11 ). Therefore, some medical researchers who may be aware of the unethical nature of a predatory journal may still be willing to publish in such journals, to meet the demands for publications ( 8 , 9 , 12 - 17 ).

While many scientists try their best to publish studies in the good quality journals indexed by reputable and the impressive metrics and databases, unfortunately, several predatory journals have begun to creep into credible repositories, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science; thus, how the academia addresses this troublesome phenomenon is a significant concern.

In this article, along with the description of novel potential features that can be used to identify fraudulent journals, we aimed to explain this issue in detail, to provide inexperienced scientists with the necessary knowledge to prevent the unwitting publication in predatory journals.

3. OPEN ACCESS MODEL AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PREDATORY JOURNALS

Authors who desire their articles to be more accessible to the public now have the option to pay out of pocket or to identify a funding source to help buy the copyright of their article from a traditional publisher. This allows the publisher to maintain quality control and remain profitable while simultaneously allowing the scientific work to be readily available to the community, through a process known as open access (OA). The OA model was established during the 1990s, accompanied by the development of high-speed Internet, and has become a strong trend, competing with the traditional model that requires readers to pay for access (Toll-Access, TA). OA journals have thrived, but OA changes the business model of a journal. In the traditional model, the readers are the customers, whereas, for many OA journals, the article author is the focus. With the OA model, publishing more articles results in OA journals generating more revenue from authors in the form of APCs ( 15 , 16 ). A “corrupt” form of the OA model has also emerged in the form of predatory journals, which encourage authors to pay APCs for articles but do not engage in a robust review process ( 1 - 6 ).

4. BOHANNON’S EXPERIMENT

A classic example illustrating the quality of a fake journal is the “experiment” performed by John Bohannon, which was published in Science, in October 2013 ( 17 ). For 10 consecutive months (from September 2012 to July 2013), Bohannon sent 304 different versions of a fake study he created to 304 OA journals. All of the articles were presented in the same form: the X molecule present in the lichen Y prevents Z cancer cells from growing. Bohannon disguised his identity by creating a database and using computer software to randomly generate the author’s name, the name of the affiliated research institute, and the name of the magical lichen. Bohannon very carefully included very detailed and false experiment descriptions and tables; he even used Google Translate to translate the articles into different languages and then back into English to ensure that the writing was not identical to the original version. His experiment showed that his articles were accepted by 157 journals, rejected by 98, and 49 journals did not have a conclusive response (29 did not respond and 20 said that they were still considering). Only 36 journals commented on the academic content of the article and, eventually, 16 of them accepted it. Bohannon’s experiment also demonstrated that Beall’s list of suspicious journals was rather precise ( 18 ). A total of 82% of the journals listed on the Beall List, after completing the review process, accepted the article.

5. ADVERSE OUTCOMES

Poor or missing review mechanisms in dishonest journals offer incentives for fraudulent work, utilizing fake, plagiarized, or distorted evidence, to reach the broader scientific community, which weakens the validity of the overall research focused on that subject. Predatory publications, therefore, pose a serious hazard to scientific research by providing an outlet for plagiarized and potentially false materials that would not otherwise be published by a peer-reviewed journal ( 12 - 14 ). Researchers can unintentionally construct their study activities on low-quality, immoral, or fabricated results, citing them in their own publications and further disseminating untrustworthy facts ( 12 - 14 , 19 , 20 ).

Legitimate publications are freely available via Web searches as written in fraudulent or pseudo-journals, but are incapable of being listed in the reputed network, rendering them useless for the science field and being unavailable to the wider scholarly community. These consequences can lead young researchers to lose enthusiasm and deprive them of the recognition that should have been their privilege. Often, these fake journals are intermittent in nature, as a consequence of continuously shifting website domains, resulting in the destruction of genuine and valuable publications that are lost to the scientific record ( 1 - 3 , 12 - 14 , 19 , 20 ).

6. PREDATORY JOURNALS ARE INDEXING IN REPUTABLE DATABASES

The credibility and reliability of citation databases, such as PubMed, Pubmed Central, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, which we depend on as trustworthy research references, are now being called in question. Citation repositories are riddled with poor-quality publications in fraudulent journals ( 21 - 30 ).

An analysis of the indexing for 944 journals that have been categorized as likely to be predatory revealed that only 9 of these journals were indexed by the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) database. Unfortunately, 28 of these predatory journals appeared in the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), and 56 journals were found in the Scopus database. Surprisingly, only 5 predatory journals appear in MEDLINE, and 3 are indexed by EMBASE ( 21 ). Manca et al. evaluated the bibliometric features of the potential predatory journals listed on Beall’s list of predatory journals, in neurology and rehabilitation fields. The results showed that 14 of 87 neurology journals and 7 of 59 rehabilitation journals were indexed in the PubMed databases ( 25 ). In the critical care medicine field, Cortegiani et al. also discovered that 2 journals indexed on Beall’s list also appeared in the Scopus database ( 26 ). In a previous report by Beall, the Journal of Current Research in Science, a questionable journal was found to allow up to 40% of plagiarized text in its articles and claims several completely fake impact factors. Surprisingly, this journal was indexed in ESCI ( 27 ).

Recent studies showed that PubMed, one of biomedical databases in the world, still contains some fraudulent journals and their publications are a major reason for concern. The stringent procedures and conditions required for the inclusion of a publication in MEDLINE are not enforced for inclusion in PubMed and PubMed Central. Consequently, PubMed and PubMed Central could well contain publications that have not qualified for inclusion in the MEDLINE database. Journals applying for inclusion in PubMed Central are not assessed by MEDLINE ’s Literature Selection Technical Review Committee. Furthermore, the journal title and the publisher name will not be considered crucial points during the evaluation process.

Predatory journals sometimes utilize journal titles that are very similar to well-known, prestigious journals and might, therefore, not be considered as fake. Subsequently, some predatory OA journals can leak into the PubMed and PubMed Central databases ( 21 , 22 , 24 - 29 ). Actually, in a previous study by Ross-White et al. on 459 predatory journals in the health and biomedical sciences, the findings showed that only 1 journal title was covered in MEDLINE database. There were 7 journal titles covered in Embase. It is also noticed that 9 of 10 journal titles indexed in bibliographic databases, acquired by the predatory publisher, were journals that had previously been published by prestigious scientific organizations. Furthermore, 39 journals with articles were cited in a systematic review or meta-analysis in PubMed Central ( 29 ). Thus, these problematic conditions raise the serious question of what measures should be enacted to avoid publishing in predatory journals, especially when some of them have successfully attained indexing in reputable databases ( 30 ).

7. SUGGESTED FEATURES OF PREDATORY JOURNALS

We suggest that the following features define predatory journals and can be used to identify suspicious journals when both submitting articles for publication and reviewing published articles ( 30 - 33 ).

- Accepts articles very quickly, usually without independent criticism or quality control measures, even for articles with irrational content.

- Peer review process is completely fast and inefficient without constructive comments.

- Rapid publication.

- Only notifies the author of the existence of APCs after the paper has been accepted, APCs that are unclear, or APCs that can be negotiated after acceptance.

- Actively sends unsolicited or bulk spam emails to invite article submission for upcoming issues or special issues or requests participation in editorial boards or as journal reviewers.

- Adds scientists to an editorial board without permission and refuses to remove them from the editorial board.

- Unqualified international scientists on the editorial board (uncheckable ORCID ID and/or RESEARCH ID).

- Although publishers claim to be leading or top publishers with very impressive impact factor or CiteScore, they are just starters.

- Uses a name or website design that closely resembles an existing prestigious journal.

- Presents a fake impact factor, metrics,databases, or having none available.

- The journal website contains grammar and spelling errors.

- Images and logos on the front page appear amateur, distorted, and fuzzy.

- Unclear procedures for handling manuscripts and journal workflows.

- The website requests that the manuscript be submitted via a personal email account.

- Published articles are unprofessional with linguistic typos.

- Published articles are outside the aims and scope of journals.

- Each published article will have a unique digital object identifier (DOI); nevertheless, it can not be checked at https://www.doi.org/

- Journal titles are different from the journals’ aims and scope.

- Journal titles are very unfamiliar with you and your colleagues.

- New OA journals are often established with an address in European countries or the United States of America with a ringing name such as “American journal of…”, or “European journal of …”, or “International journal of …”.

- Journal titles simultaneously combine two or more distinct fields such as “Journal of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmacy” so as to lure more papers and earn more revenue from APC.

- No information regarding where and how articles will be digitally conserved is provided.

- No withdrawal or retraction policy is outlined.

- Journals do not use well-known softwares against plagiarism and there is no legal action for plagiarism.

- Journal website posts non-academic and non-related advertisements which are mostly connected to publishers’ conferences.

- Fraudulent placement of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) logo on the journal website, without belonging to COPE.

- The “International Standard Serial Number” (ISSN) of an OA journal cannot be verified in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and/or The Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources (ROAD).

- Falsely claims indexing in various reputed databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and/or Web of Science.

These characteristics can be used to flag potentially untrustworthy publications and may be especially useful for novice researchers who are not yet familiar with the differences between reputable journals and predatory journals.

Also, Editors and Reviewers of the submitted papers need to keep respect of the journal and check all methodological elements in assessment of the quality of the submitted papers, especially of the used correct statistical analysis and presentation of the results, trying to keep the scientific truth in medicine ( 30 - 34 ).

Every review must be based on the scientific proofs and arguments like on original proofs in research’s results described in articles which reviewers assessed and evaluated during the review process ( 32 , 34 ).

8. CONCLUSION

The prevailing scholarly ethos of “publish or perish” and the OA model have combined to contribute to the present state of affairs. Prior to new submissions, researchers can decide whether the journals they submit their papers to are trustworthy, not only by making use of ‘blacklists’, such as Beall’s list that list potentially predatory journals, but also by carefully evaluating the characteristics of each journals’ DOAJ, ROAD, and COPE registries and the available indexing on reputable databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and/or Web of Science.

These evaluations should be performed on the official websites of the databases and registries, instead of relying on the claims of the journal. To avoid potential predatory journals, researchers should consider some of the suggested features of predatory journals described in this study. Together, as both readers and authors, we should fully boycott fake journals.

Author contribution:

Each author was included in all phases of preparation of this article. Final proofreading was made by the first and last author (N.M.D and I.M.) before printing.

Conflicts of interest:

There are no conflicts of interest.

Financial support and sponsorship: