SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Significado y trascendencia de los paper mills o fábricas de artículos
15 references·0 citing·50 second hop
Significado y trascendencia de los paper mills o fábricas de artículos (2024)Significado y trascendencia de los paper …Misconduct in biomedical research: A meta-analysis and systematic review (2023)Misconduct in biomedical rese…Threats to scholarly research integrity arising from paper mills: a rapid scoping review (2022)Threats to scholarly research…Retracted papers originating from paper mills: cross sectional study (2022)Retracted papers originating …The raw truth about paper mills (2021)The raw truth about paper mil…Fake data, paper mills, and their authors: The International Journal of Cancer reacts to this threat to scientific integrity (2021)Fake data, paper mills, and t…Predatory Journals: What They Are and How to Avoid Them (2020)Predatory Journals: What They…Digital magic, or the dark arts of the 21 st century—how can journals and peer reviewers detect manuscripts and publications from paper mills? (2020)Digital magic, or the dark ar…Journal Impact Factor: Widely Used, Misused and Abused (2019)Journal Impact Factor: Widely…Systematic fabrication of scientific images revealed (2018)Systematic fabrication of sci…Research Misconduct: A Neglected Plague (2017)Research Misconduct: A Neglec…Bibliometric Indices of Scientific Journals: Time to overcome the obsession and think beyond the Impact Factor (2017)Bibliometric Indices of Scien…Publish or Perish mantra in the medical field: A systematic review of the reasons, consequences and remedies (2016)Publish or Perish mantra in t…Research misconduct and data fraud in clinical trials: prevalence and causal factors (2015)Research misconduct and data …The Continued Movement for Open Access to Peer-Reviewed Literature (2013)The Continued Movement for Op…Impact factors: uses and abuses (2002)Impact factors: uses and abus…Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor (2000)Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact (2001)Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review (2008)Bibliometric Indicators: Quality Measurements of Scientific Publication (2010)How open science helps researchers succeed (2016)Scientists behaving badly (2005)How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data (2009)Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling (2012)Criminalization of scientific misconduct (2018)Factors associated with scientific misconduct and questionable research practices in health professions education (2019)The perceived causes of research misconduct among faculty members in the natural, social, and applied sciences (2019)Publish or perish: a systematic review of interventions to increase academic publication rates (2006)Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications (2012)Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased? (2013)Female authorship of covid-19 research in manuscripts submitted to 11 biomedical journals: cross sectional study (2021)Preserving professional identities, behaviors, and values in digital professionalism using social networking sites; a systematic review (2021)The h-Index: An Indicator of Research and Publication Output (2023)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor (2006)Metrics of activity in social networks are correlated with traditional metrics of scientific impact in endocrinology journals (2019)Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021)Sustainable scientific publishing: a pilot survey on stakeholder motivations and opinions (2024)Avoiding Twisted Pixels: Ethical Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Manipulation of Scientific Digital Images (2010)The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications (2016)Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: the Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience (2018)Abuse of ORCID’s weaknesses by authors who use paper mills (2021)Paper mills: a novel form of publishing malpractice affecting psychology (2023)China's Publication Bazaar (2013)Publish or impoverish (2017)Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart's Law in action (2019)China bans cash rewards for publishing papers (2020)Publication and collaboration anomalies in academic papers originating from a paper mill: Evidence from a Russia‐based paper mill (2023)Predatory publishers are corrupting open access (2012)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison (2017)Journal citation reports and the definition of a predatory journal: The case of the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) (2021)Predatory Journals: What the Researchers and Authors Should Know (2024)Searching for studies: A guide to information retrieval for Campbell systematic reviews (2024)The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science (2021)Quantitative research assessment: using metrics against gamed metrics (2023)Paper mill challenges: past, present, and future (2024)Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping (2009)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)Using large language models to generate silicon samples in consumer and marketing research: Challenges, opportunities, and guidelines (2024)Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production (2025)Journal of Global Health’s Guidelines for Reporting Analyses of Big Data Repositories Open to the Public (GRABDROP): preventing ‘paper mills’, duplicate publications, misuse of statistical inference, and inappropriate use of artificial intelligence (2025)Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (2015)The strain on scientific publishing (2024)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2020Predatory Journals: What They Are and How to Avoid Them190 cited
  • 2022Retracted papers originating from paper mills: cross sectional study156 cited
  • 2020Digital magic, or the dark arts of the 21 st century—how can journals and peer reviewers detect manuscripts and publications from paper mills?133 cited
  • 2002Impact factors: uses and abuses123 cited
  • 2021The raw truth about paper mills99 cited
  • 2016Publish or Perish mantra in the medical field: A systematic review of the reasons, consequences and remedies94 cited
  • 2015Research misconduct and data fraud in clinical trials: prevalence and causal factors84 cited
  • 2022Threats to scholarly research integrity arising from paper mills: a rapid scoping review70 cited
  • 2018Systematic fabrication of scientific images revealed38 cited
  • 2017Bibliometric Indices of Scientific Journals: Time to overcome the obsession and think beyond the Impact Factor36 cited
  • 2021Fake data, paper mills, and their authors: The International Journal of Cancer reacts to this threat to scientific integrity35 cited
  • 2013The Continued Movement for Open Access to Peer-Reviewed Literature28 cited
  • 2023Misconduct in biomedical research: A meta-analysis and systematic review27 cited
  • 2017Research Misconduct: A Neglected Plague15 cited

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

  • 2019Journal Impact Factor: Widely Used, Misused and Abused14 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.