Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40772966›Full record

ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2026

[Scientific fraud and dubious publication practices].

Peter Nydahl, Mohamed Chahdi, Pia Goetze, Roland Eßl-Maurer, Carsten Hermes, Andreas Kocks, Anna-Henrikje Seidlein, Susanne Krotsetis

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Peter NydahlPflegewissenschaft und -entwicklung, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Str. 40, Haus V40, 24105, Kiel, Deutschland. Peter.Nydahl@uksh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5178-0364
Mohamed ChahdiKlinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Deutschland.
Pia GoetzeKlinik für angeborene Herzfehler und Kinderkardiologie, K1-Ethikberaterin im Gesundheitswesen, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Deutschland.
Roland Eßl-MaurerPflegedirektion, Koordination Entwicklung klinische Pflegepraxis, Uniklinikum Salzburg, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität, Salzburg, Österreich.
Carsten HermesHochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg (HAW Hamburg), Hamburg, Deutschland.
Andreas KocksPflegeforschung, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland.
Anna-Henrikje SeidleinInstitut für Ethik und Geschichte der Medizin, Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Deutschland.
Susanne KrotsetisPflegewissenschaft und -entwicklung, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Questionable publication practices and predatory journals pose an increasing challenge to scientific integrity. These publication models advertise rapid publication times but lack essential quality controls such as peer-review processes, transparency, and charge high fees, which facilitates the dissemination of unreliable research findings. There is an increased risk, particularly for less experienced researchers, of unknowingly publishing in such journals or using their content uncritically. This can negatively impact individual career paths, the scientific community, and public perception of scientific knowledge. The article outlines the key characteristics of predatory journals and analyzes their potential consequences for science, as well as the quality and dissemination of research findings. Practical tools, such as checklists and established resources, are also presented to assist researchers in identifying and avoiding dubious publication offers. Finally, the article emphasizes the importance of raising awareness about this issue to uphold scientific standards and ensure the long-term reliability of research.

Indexed as

Periodicals as TopicPublishingScientific MisconductChecklistEthics, ResearchGermanyHumansPeer Review, ResearchFake SciencePeer-review standardsPredatory journalsResearch ethicsScientific integrity

Identifiers

PMID40772966
PMCPMC13212799

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.