Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37101915›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2022

Unsolicited solicitations: identifying characteristics of unsolicited emails from potentially predatory journals and the role of librarians.

Paije Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Email invitations to publish: Academically sound (such as SAFP) versus potentially predatory journals.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2024
    Article
  5. [Predatory journals: What are they and how to avoid them?]Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Paije Wilsonpaije.wilson@wisc.edu, Health Sciences Librarian, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0799-4776

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Email solicitations for manuscript submissions are a common tactic employed by predatory journals to attract potential victims. Both new and established researchers alike have fallen prey to this tactic, justifying the need for librarians to provide further education and support in this area. This commentary provides a succinct overview of predatory journals; briefly describes the problem of predatory journal email solicitations; explains the role librarians can play in their identification; and lists some red flags and tactics librarians can tell researchers to look out for, as informed by the literature and the author's analysis of 60 unsolicited journal emails she received in her own institutional inbox.

Indexed as

LibrariansPeriodicals as TopicElectronic MailHumansResearch PersonnelCommentaryfraudlibrarianspredatory journalspublishingscholarly communications

Identifiers

PMID37101915
PMCPMC10124592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.