ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
The misalignment of incentives in academic publishing and implications for journal reform.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. 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.
- Student Perceptions of Obstacles in Science Careers are Not Altered by Scientist Stories of Challenges.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- Publication lags are barriers to conservation in South American ichthyology.Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Scientific Judgment: Assistance, Dependence, or Disruption?Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Paying peer reviewers: benefits, risks, and challenges.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Implementing Reproducible Fisheries Research: A Decade of Experience With the Kahawai Reporting System.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2026Article
- Fragile research systems, brain drain, and predatory publishing in under-resourced countries.microLife · 2026Article
- An evaluation system for scientific journals.EMBO reports · 2026Article
- Promoting informed health choices: the long and winding road.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2025Article
- Reformation of science publishing: the Stockholm Declaration.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Provenance and Funding of Extremely Cited Biomedical Articles Published Between 2003 and 2024.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- Exploring the Dilemma of AI Use in Medical Research and Knowledge Synthesis: A Perspective on Deep Research Tools.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Journals Operating Predatory Practices Are Systematically Eroding the Science Ethos: A Gate and Code Strategy to Minimise Their Operating Space and Restore Research Best Practice.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Article
- Dialogues about the practice of science.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- An Emerging Issue in Journal Publishing: The Use of Artificial Intelligence to Generate Letters to the Editor.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For most researchers, academic publishing serves two goals that are often misaligned-knowledge dissemination and establishing scientific credentials. While both goals can encourage research with significant depth and scope, the latter can also pressure scholars to maximize publication metrics. Commercial publishing companies have capitalized on the centrality of publishing to the scientific enterprises of knowledge dissemination and academic recognition to extract large profits from academia by leveraging unpaid services from reviewers, creating financial barriers to research dissemination, and imposing substantial fees for open access. We present a set of perspectives exploring alternative models for communicating and disseminating scientific research. Acknowledging that the success of new publishing models depends on their impact on existing approaches for assigning academic credit that often prioritize prestigious publications and metrics such as citations and impact factors, we also provide various viewpoints on reforming academic evaluation.
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.