World Neurosurg. 2022 Feb 18:S1878-8750(22)00198-X. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.02.051. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Predatory journals (PJs) publish research with little to no rigorous peer review in exchange for money. It is unclear what proportion of researchers are vulnerable to PJs and which factors are associated with vulnerability. In this study, the authors evaluate the vulnerability of African neurosurgery researchers to PJs and identify their correlates.
METHODS: A three-part English and French e-surveys were distributed via social media to African consultants and trainees from November 01 to December 01, 2021. Chi-Square, Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman’s Rho correlation, odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals evaluated bivariable relationships. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: One hundred and one participants with a mean age of 34.9 years responded to the survey (response rate=56.1%). Respondents were male (n=83, 82.2%), consultant neurosurgeons (n=39, 38.6%), and from Central Africa (n=34, 33.7%). Sixty-six respondents had published one or more articles in the past, and 13 had published at least one article in a PJ. A PJ had contacted 34 respondents via email, and eight had reviewed articles for a PJ. Nineteen respondents knew about Think. Check. Submit. and 13 knew Beall’s list. Publication in PJs was correlated with the respondents’ age (R=0.23, P=0.02) and total scholarly output (R=0.38, P<001).
CONCLUSION: Young African neurosurgery researchers are vulnerable to PJs primarily because they are not familiar with the concept of PJs or how to identify them.
PMID:35189419 | DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.02.051
