ArticleProgress in orthodontics2023
"Dear Doctor, greetings of the day!": A 1-year observational study of presumed predatory journal invitations.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unsolicited Email and Predatory Solicitations: A Retrospective Case Study of a Canadian Hospital Pharmacist and the Tip of a Larger Iceberg.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2026Article
- Financial barriers in urology publishing: an analysis of legitimate and predatory journals.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Medical Student Comfort with Academic Publishing: A Single-Institution Experience with a Supplemental Interactive Lecture.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Predatory Publishing Awareness Among Dental Interns in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- Update on novel validly published and included bacterial taxa derived from human clinical specimens and taxonomic revisions published in 2023.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Review
- 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 · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed at investigating the predatory publishing phenomenon in orthodontics by analyzing the content of unsolicited e-mail invitations received within 12 months.
methodsAll electronic invitations for manuscript submission, review and editorial membership received between 1 October 2021 and 30 September 2022 were collected from an orthodontist's inbox. The following data were recorded for each e-mail: date, journal title and origin, requested contribution, e-mail language, relevance to the researcher's discipline, journal characteristics (claimed metrics, editorial services, article types accepted, and publication fees), journal/publisher contact information and online presence. Journal/Publisher legitimacy and publishing standards were evaluated by listing in the Beall's list of potential predatory journals and publishers, the Predatory Reports of Cabell's Scholarly Analytics, and the Directory of Open Access Journals.
resultsA total of 875 e-mail invitations deriving from 256 journals were retrieved within the observation period, with most of them soliciting article submissions. More than 76% of the solicitations originated from journals and publishers included in the blocklists used in the study. Salient features of predatory journals like flattering language, abundant grammatical errors, unclear publication charges and wide variety of article types and topics accepted for publication were confirmed for the examined journals/publishers.
conclusionsNearly 8 out of 10 unsolicited e-mail invitations sent to orthodontists for scholarly contribution may be related to journals suspicious for publishing malpractices and suboptimal standards. Excessive flattering language, grammatical errors, broad range of submissions, and incomplete journal contact information were commonly encountered findings. Researchers in orthodontics should be alert to the unethical policies of illegitimate journals and their harmful consequences on the scientific literature.
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.