SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
All publishers are predatory - some are bigger than others
7 references·6 citing·47 second hop
All publishers are predatory - some are bigger than others (2018)All publishers are predatory - some are b…Revisiting the Term Predatory Open Access Publishing (2019)Revisiting the Term Predatory…The preprint dilemma (2017)The preprint dilemmaThe natural selection of bad science (2016)The natural selection of bad …Investigating journals: The dark side of publishing (2013)Investigating journals: The d…Scientific Utopia: I. Opening Scientific Communication (2012)Scientific Utopia: I. Opening…Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)Editorial peer review for imp…Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2006)Editorial peer review for imp…The artificial intelligence revolution...in unethical publishing: Will AI worsen our dysfunctional publishing system? (2024)The artificial intelligence r…Wilfully submitting to and publishing in predatory journals - a covert form of research misconduct? (2021)Wilfully submitting to and pu…Predatory journals (2020)Predatory journalsA brief summary of the impact and performance of different scientific fields at the AABC (2020)A brief summary of the impact…Independent, Publicly Funded Journals Adhering to Platinum Open Access Are the Future of Responsible Scholarly Publishing (2019)Independent, Publicly Funded …A emergência dos preprints para a ciência brasileira: considerações sob a ótica da Enfermagem (2019)A emergência dos preprints pa…Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction (1992)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. (2008)The elephant in the living room: or extending the conversation about the politics of evidence (2009)Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial (2011)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)Accounting for the effects of accountability. (1999)Scientific Utopia (2012)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Measurement Schmeasurement: Questionable Measurement Practices and How to Avoid Them (2020)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (1990)Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (1991)An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)How Many Participants Do We Have to Include in Properly Powered Experiments? A Tutorial of Power Analysis with Reference Tables (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension (2021)Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science (2021)The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 (2011)Beyond Beall’s List: Better understanding predatory publishers (2015)The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics (2016)Research Combining Physical Activity and Sleep: A Bibliometric Analysis (2019)Predatory Open Access Journals are Indexed in Reputable Databases: a Revisiting Issue or an Unsolved Problem (2020)Editorial misconduct: the case of online predatory journals (2022)Who publishes in “predatory” journals? (2014)Predatory journals: no definition, no defence (2019)The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity (2020)Keep calm and carry on: moral panic, predatory publishers, peer review, and the emperor’s new clothes (2022)Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review (2024)Quantity over quality of publications: Are we using the right metrics to judge author’s productivity and impact in biomedical research? (2024)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)Predatory journals recruit fake editor (2017)Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: a survey (2019)Awareness of Jordanian Researchers About Predatory Journals: A Need for Training (2024)Article Processing Charge Hyperinflation and Price Insensitivity: An Open Access Sequel to the Serials Crisis (2019)Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time (2023)Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research (2024)Artificial intelligence in scholarly peer review: a scoping review of applications, risks, and governance challenges (2026)Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison (2017)Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why? (2018)Problems and challenges of predatory journals (2018)Protecting the Value of Medical Science in the Age of Social Media and “Fake News” (2018)Rise of the Rxivs: How Preprint Servers are Changing the Publishing Process (2020)The causes, impacts and countermeasures of COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A systematic review using narrative synthesis (2021)Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation (2011)Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals (2012)A Stronger Post-Publication Culture Is Needed for Better Science (2014)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2016The natural selection of bad science858 cited
  • 2012Scientific Utopia: I. Opening Scientific Communication368 cited
  • 2013Investigating journals: The dark side of publishing349 cited
  • 2007Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies312 cited
  • 2017The preprint dilemma103 cited
  • 2019Revisiting the Term Predatory Open Access Publishing76 cited
  • 2006Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies74 cited

Cited by

  • 2021Wilfully submitting to and publishing in predatory journals - a covert form of research misconduct?25 cited
  • 2020Predatory journals15 cited
  • 2024The artificial intelligence revolution...in unethical publishing: Will AI worsen our dysfunctional publishing system?14 cited
  • 2019Independent, Publicly Funded Journals Adhering to Platinum Open Access Are the Future of Responsible Scholarly Publishing14 cited
  • 2020A brief summary of the impact and performance of different scientific fields at the AABC10 cited
  • 2019A emergência dos preprints para a ciência brasileira: considerações sob a ótica da Enfermagem8 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work