Unsolicited Email and Predatory Solicitations: A Retrospective Case Study of a Canadian Hospital Pharmacist and the Tip of a Larger Iceberg.

Background: Open access publishing has broadened research dissemination, but it has also enabled the rise of predatory journals and conferences, posing challenges for health care professionals, including pharmacists. Objectives: To analyze unsolicited professional emails received by a hospital pharmacist and to characterize potentially predatory solicitations. Methods: All email messages received over a 31-day period in 2024 by a senior Canadian hospital pharmacist involved in research were reviewed and assessed according to 12 indicators of predation, including false impact factors, suggestion to submit manuscript by email, flattery, solicitation for an unrelated field, and short deadlines. Results: Of 1228 emails received over the study period, 453 (37%) contained at least one predatory indicator, with a total of 494 distinct solicitations: 347 (70%) for manuscript submission, 116 (24%) for conference attendance, 15 (3%) for republication of a previously published article, 11 (2%) for peer review, and 5 (1%) for webinar participation. The emails contained an average of 3.6 (standard deviation 1.7) indicators. Conclusions: One-third of the emails received were predatory in nature, highlighting the scale of the phenomenon.