ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2016
Statement on Publication Ethics for Editors and Publishers.
Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of Retracted Publications on Methotrexate.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Evolution of Research Reporting Standards: Adapting to the Influence of Artificial Intelligence, Statistics Software, and Writing Tools.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Review
- Employing Unprofessional Editors for Handling Submissions in Scholarly Journals.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Review
- Predatory journals: Authors and readers beware.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
- Article
- Conflicts of interest disclosure policies among Chinese medical journals: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices: Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement.Journal of Korean medical science · 2018Review
- From Paper to Practice; Indexing Systems and Ethical Standards.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- Editorial Abuses.Journal of Korean medical science · 2017Article
- Fortifying the Corrective Nature of Post-publication Peer Review: Identifying Weaknesses, Use of Journal Clubs, and Rewarding Conscientious Behavior.Science and engineering ethics · 2017Article
- Letter to the Editor: Predatory Practices and How to Circumvent Them: a Viewpoint from India.Journal of Korean medical science · 2017Article
- The Pressure to Publish More and the Scope of Predatory Publishing Activities.Journal of Korean medical science · 2016Review
- How Can the Implementation of Ethical Norms Be Guaranteed in Biomedical Studies?Journal of reproduction & infertilityArticle
- Predatory journals- Can we stem the rot?Journal of postgraduate medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The digitization and related developments in journal editing and publishing necessitate increasing the awareness of all stakeholders of science communication in the emerging global problems and possible solutions. Journal editors and publishers are frequently encountered with the fast-growing problems of authorship, conflicts of interest, peer review, research misconduct, unethical citations, and inappropriate journal impact metrics. While the number of erroneous and unethical research papers and wasteful, or 'predatory', journals is increasing exponentially, responsible editors are urged to 'clean' the literature by correcting or retracting related articles. Indexers are advised to implement measures for accepting truly influential and ethical journals and delisting sources with predatory publishing practices. Updating knowledge and skills of authors, editors and publishers, developing and endorsing recommendations of global editorial associations, and (re)drafting journal instructions can be viewed as potential tools for improving ethics of academic journals. The aim of this Statement is to increase awareness of all stakeholders of science communication of the emerging ethical issues in journal editing and publishing and initiate a campaign of upgrading and enforcing related journal instructions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.