Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review
Abstract Background Academic publishing is a cornerstone of scholarly communications, yet is unfortunately open to abuse, having given rise to ‘predatory publishers’– groups that employ aggressive marketing tactics, are deficient in methods and ethics, and bypass peer review. Preventing these predat...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2024-01-01
|
| Series: | BMC Medical Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05024-x |
| _version_ | 1797274206552981504 |
|---|---|
| author | Owen W Tomlinson |
| author_facet | Owen W Tomlinson |
| author_sort | Owen W Tomlinson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Academic publishing is a cornerstone of scholarly communications, yet is unfortunately open to abuse, having given rise to ‘predatory publishers’– groups that employ aggressive marketing tactics, are deficient in methods and ethics, and bypass peer review. Preventing these predatory publishers from infiltrating scholarly activity is of high importance, and students must be trained in this area to increase awareness and reduce use. The scope of this issue in the context of medical students remains unknown, and therefore this sought to examine the breadth of the current literature base. Methods A rapid scoping review was undertaken, adhering to adapted PRISMA guidelines. Six databases (ASSIA, EBSCO, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) were systematically searched for content related to predatory publishing and medical students. Results were single-screened, facilitated by online reviewing software. Resultant data were narratively described, with common themes identified. Results After searching and screening, five studies were included, representing a total of 1338 students. Two predominant themes– understanding, and utilisation– of predatory publishers was identified. These themes revealed that medical students were broadly unaware of the issue of predatory publishing, and that a small number have already, or would consider, using their services. Conclusion There remains a lack of understanding of the threat that predatory publishers pose amongst medical students. Future research and education in this domain will be required to focus on informing medical students on the issue, and the implication of engaging with predatory publishers. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T14:55:04Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0073073539374fe8ade5396c96736132 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6920 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T14:55:04Z |
| publishDate | 2024-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Medical Education |
| spelling | doaj.art-0073073539374fe8ade5396c967361322024-03-05T19:27:12ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202024-01-012411910.1186/s12909-024-05024-xPredatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping reviewOwen W Tomlinson0Department of Clinical and Biomedical Science, Faculty of Health and Life Science, University of Exeter Medical School, University of ExeterAbstract Background Academic publishing is a cornerstone of scholarly communications, yet is unfortunately open to abuse, having given rise to ‘predatory publishers’– groups that employ aggressive marketing tactics, are deficient in methods and ethics, and bypass peer review. Preventing these predatory publishers from infiltrating scholarly activity is of high importance, and students must be trained in this area to increase awareness and reduce use. The scope of this issue in the context of medical students remains unknown, and therefore this sought to examine the breadth of the current literature base. Methods A rapid scoping review was undertaken, adhering to adapted PRISMA guidelines. Six databases (ASSIA, EBSCO, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) were systematically searched for content related to predatory publishing and medical students. Results were single-screened, facilitated by online reviewing software. Resultant data were narratively described, with common themes identified. Results After searching and screening, five studies were included, representing a total of 1338 students. Two predominant themes– understanding, and utilisation– of predatory publishers was identified. These themes revealed that medical students were broadly unaware of the issue of predatory publishing, and that a small number have already, or would consider, using their services. Conclusion There remains a lack of understanding of the threat that predatory publishers pose amongst medical students. Future research and education in this domain will be required to focus on informing medical students on the issue, and the implication of engaging with predatory publishers.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05024-xPublishingReviewStudentsInformation literacyUndergraduate |
| spellingShingle | Owen W Tomlinson Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review BMC Medical Education Publishing Review Students Information literacy Undergraduate |
| title | Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review |
| title_full | Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review |
| title_fullStr | Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review |
| title_short | Predatory publishing in medical education: a rapid scoping review |
| title_sort | predatory publishing in medical education a rapid scoping review |
| topic | Publishing Review Students Information literacy Undergraduate |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05024-x |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT owenwtomlinson predatorypublishinginmedicaleducationarapidscopingreview |