ReviewRheumatology international2017
Publishing in black and white: the relevance of listing of scientific journals.
Review in Rheumatology international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2020Pooled it
- [Publish well in anesthesiology: Quality standards and dealing with predatory journals].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2026Article
- Present-day tools for assessing publishing integrity in biomedical science represent valuable work in progress.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Article
- Statistical data presentation: a primer for rheumatology researchers.Rheumatology international · 2021Review
- Scholarly publishing and journal targeting in the time of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists and other specialists.Rheumatology international · 2020Article
- Integrity of clinical research conduct, reporting, publishing, and post-publication promotion in rheumatology.Clinical rheumatology · 2020Review
- PubMed Central archiving: a major milestone for a scholarly journal.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2020Article
- Quality and Impact of Survey Research Among Anesthesiologists: A Systematic Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2020Review
- Open Access Publishing in India: Coverage, Relevance, and Future Perspectives.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Article
- Revisiting the Term Predatory Open Access Publishing.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Unravelling the mysteries of predatory conferences.British dental journal · 2019Article
- "Blacklists" and "whitelists": a salutary warning concerning the prevalence of racist language in discussions of predatory publishing.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
- Researcher and Author Impact Metrics: Variety, Value, and Context.Journal of Korean medical science · 2018Review
- More than black and white of scientific publishing.Rheumatology international · 2018Article
- Better understanding of publishing practices and indexing of target journals is essential.Rheumatology international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific publishing, including in the field of Rheumatology, is evolving rapidly. Predatory journals are one of the major threats to contemporary publishing, especially to eager and naïve authors. In this narrative review, we discuss mechanisms that authors can employ to white list genuine scientific journals and blacklist "predatory" ones. Inclusion of a journal in reputed indices such as Medline (but not just Pubmed), Web of Science, Scopus or Embase raises the likelihood that the journal is genuine, more so if it is included in the current Journal Citation Reports. Other commercially available whitelists also exist, so also whitelists published by regulatory authorities in some countries. A commercially available blacklist has emerged since the very useful Beall's blacklist became defunct. In the absence of access to a whitelist or blacklist, certain characteristics such as repeated email solicitations for articles with an extremely narrow deadline from unknown sources, lack of inclusion in reputed indices, journals not published or endorsed by national or international society and scarcity of currently published articles should render authors suspicious of the genuine nature of a journal. National societies should work together to generate subject-specific (including Rheumatology specific) whitelists that can be available free of cost to authors from all over the world.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28983732What 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.