ArticleMedical education online2022
Medical Resident Awareness of Predatory Journal Practices in an International Medical Education System.
Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Scientific fraud and dubious publication practices].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026Review
- Article
- Knowledge, practices, and perception of predatory journals among North-African Dental University Hospital Doctors.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Predatory medical journals' awareness among clinical and non-clinical researchers in Saudi Arabia: a survey.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Perceptions of Arab researchers regarding publishing scientific research: A cross-sectional study.Accountability in research · 2026Article
- Has open access in neurosurgery made access easier but sharing harder? A National survey from an LMIC (Turkey).Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Research literacy and its predictors among university students and graduates identified by machine learning and spatial analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Medical Student Comfort with Academic Publishing: A Single-Institution Experience with a Supplemental Interactive Lecture.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Open Access Publishing Metrics, Cost, and Impact in Health Professions Education Journals.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- "The Best Home for This Paper": A Qualitative Study of How Authors Select Where to Submit Manuscripts.Perspectives on medical education · 2024Article
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
introductionLearning research methodology is increasingly becoming an essential part of graduate medical education worldwide, with many regulatory and accreditation bodies requiring residents to participate in scholarship. Research methodology workshops have become a standard part of medical curricula; however, there is limited data on how much training on journal selection and the publication process trainees receive. The alarming growth of predatory journals has made it increasingly difficult for researchers, especially trainees and early career physicians, to distinguish these publications from reputable journals. The purpose of this study is to assess the knowledge of reputable and predatory publishing practices amongst medical trainees in an international medical education setting in the United Arab Emirates.
methodsA survey on credible journal practices based on the 'Think. Check. Submit' initiative was sent to all graduate medical education trainees at two large academic medical centers in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Descriptive statistics were used to tabulate variable frequencies.
resultsOver half of the 160 respondents reported receiving prior research methodology training and 42.5% had at least one publication. The majority of the trainees selected impact factor and the quality of the peer-review process as characteristics of reputable journals. Ambiguous editorial board and rapid publication process were recognized as characteristics of predatory journals by >65% of trainees, however, 95% of all trainees were unaware of Beall's list or other resources to help select a journal for publication. 15.2% of trainees who received unsolicited emails from publishers submitted their manuscripts to the unfamiliar journals, citing peer recommendation and pressure to publish from their training programs as reasons.
conclusionTrainees in the United Arab Emirates were mostly unaware of reputable publication practices and are vulnerable to publishing in predatory journals. Policy and educational reform are necessary to maintain the credibility and integrity of the scientific process.
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.