Analysis of potential predatory journals in radiology
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request
    Unspecified - Original Article
    P: 498-503
    September 2020

    Analysis of potential predatory journals in radiology

    Diagn Interv Radiol 2020;26(5):498-503
    1. Department of Radiology, Okmeydanı Research and Trainig Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
    No information available.
    No information available
    Received Date: 17.04.2020
    Accepted Date: 22.06.2020
    PDF
    Cite
    Share
    Request

    ABSTRACT

    Purpose

    The aim of this study is to determine the presence and evaluate the features of potential predatory journals in the radiology field.

    Methods

    The presence of the keywords related to radiology listed in the name of journals was investigated in Beall’s list. We have searched and recorded the features and the information of the included journals listed under the following headings: address and location, publishing features, editorial board, indexing features, submission, and peer-review processes.

    Results

    A total of 66 radiology journals from 27 publishers were identified from the updated version of the original Beall's list. Regarding the publishers, 33 journals (50%) reported an address in the United States of America, while others were from United Kingdom, India, Hong Kong, Iran, and Canada. While 44 journals' (67%) website reported a contact address, no addresses were declared in the website of 21 journals (32%). The median time of publication activity was 3.5 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1–5 years; range, 0–16 years). Thirty-five journals (53%) indicated their publication ethics policy on the website. Forty-seven (71%) journals reported a regular editorial board (EB) list. The competency of the EB was considered as "inappropriate" in 27 (41%) journals. Only 18% of the total number of EB members had affiliations related to radiology (n=286/1566). Forty journals (61%) did not report any indexing and database coverage. We found 26 journals (39%) which had a DOI number in its latest 5 articles. Fifty-nine (89%) journals clearly reported article processing change (APC) on the webpage. The median APC value was 641.43 USD (IQR, 300–918.75 USD; range, 100–2588 USD). Considering the latest 5 articles, the number of journals with radiologic images in all of the articles was 8 (12%). Mean peer-review time was 63.5 days (IQR, 21.75–87.5 days; range, 1–237 days) for the journals which indicated the submission and acceptance dates clearly.

    Conclusion

    We demonstrated the several main characteristics of potential predatory journals in the radiology field such as reliability of the reported address, APC, publication frequencies, indexing features, features of published article and peer-review time which were all found to be similar to the characteristics of potential predatory journals in other biomedical fields.

    References

    2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House