ArticleBMC medical education2026
Predatory medical journals' awareness among clinical and non-clinical researchers in Saudi Arabia: a survey.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the surge in scientific publication over the years, there is an exponential rise in predatory publishing. The aim of the current study was to assess predatory journals’ awareness among clinical and non-clinical researchers.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital, affiliated university and the research center. Both males/females, physicians, professors, researchers, students, working in a hospital, university or a research center were enrolled. The primary outcome was the awareness of predatory journals, and to identify the predictors of awareness. The estimated sample size was 369. The survey consisted of 33 questions divided into five sections: (i) General information (ii) Research publications (iii) Awareness of predatory journals (iv) Open access (v) Journal selection. The questions were either yes/no or 5-point Likert scale. An electronic survey design was used for data collection. Variables were compared by aware and unaware groups using chi-square test. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify the predictors of awareness. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4.
resultsOf the total 328 respondents, females were 178(54.4%), near half had bachelors/master’s degree 156(48.3%), 117(35%) were physicians, 37(11%) researchers, 17(5%) professors, and 38(12%) students. Half of the participants 167(50.9%) were aware of the term ‘predatory medical journals. Only 56(17%) reported knowing how to spot a predatory journal. 15(4.5%) have reported publishing in a predatory journal due to lack of knowledge (6/15; 40%), to meet a deadline (3/15; 20%), suggested by a colleague (3/15; 20%), or due to (1/15; 6.6%) fast publication process. Reported sources of information were; colleagues 141(42%), attending a course 78(24%), and spam emails 73(22%). 69(21%) respondents reported using Clarivate Master Journal List, 54(16%) SCImago Journal & Country Rank list, 48(15%) use DOAJ. 282(85%) didn’t hear of the educational website Think.Check.Submit. Age (p = 0.036), gender (p = 0.0007), qualification (p = 0.0002), profession (p = 0.01), working in a research center (p = 0.005), and professional training (p = 0.0006) were significantly different by predatory journal awareness.
conclusionPublishing in a predatory medical journal is a global threat to the scientific community and academic integrity. Efficient steps need to be taken in order to address predatory journals’ invasion, and raising awareness.
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.