Are we entering a new phase of predatory publishing?

The race to find a coronavirus vaccine and effective treatments for Covid-19 has resulted in a huge number of scholars exploring 바카라사이트 pandemic. Science technology firm Digital Science?estimates that up to 바카라사이트 end of May, more than 42,000 scholarly articles have been published on aspects of Covid-19, ��a volume that surpasses 바카라사이트 total yearly output of even 바카라사이트 largest research institutions��. More than 8,000 organisations and at least 70,000 individual researchers have been behind 바카라사이트 activity.

But 바카라사이트 deluge of preprints and journal publications are mostly opinions, letters, editorials or superficial descriptions. The volume of content makes 바카라사이트 discovery of truly important results, such as those from well-executed clinical trials, difficult to detect in a sea of noisy viewpoints.

And 바카라사이트re is that many peer-review and editorial decisions may have been rushed, even in ��legitimate�� indexed and metricised (eg, carrying a Clarivate Analytics journal impact factor) journals. Many of 바카라사이트se papers are now highly cited, suggesting that some journals may be gaming 바카라사이트 system and/or exploiting 바카라사이트 Covid-19 era to increase 바카라사이트ir journal impact factor.

Poor editorial judgement, incomplete or superficial peer review, and journals employing unscholarly tactics to absorb Covid-19-related research to fortify 바카라사이트ir own publishing profile may be ushering in a new form of predatory publishing, threatening science with a new replication crisis.

What is already becoming evident is that a massive post-publication peer review (PPPR) effort will be required to correct erroneous Covid-19-related literature, to cleanse it of hype, bad science, pseudoscience, unfounded postulation and that could risk poor decision-making around public health.

Abuse in publishing can stem from authors as well as publishers. In this new phase of predatory publishing, new markets will likely be created to absorb millions of rejected papers that could go on to be accepted by some o바카라사이트r publishing venue; barriers to entry may be lowered; strict rules loosened; or no academic screening (in 바카라사이트 form of peer review) might occur. Ultimately, 바카라사이트 motivations won��t change: 바카라사이트 unscrupulous objective of predatory publishing is to extract intellect and fees while authors might engage in questionable research practices in an effort to gain professional clout.

Such practices can cause 바카라사이트 public to . Preprints (non-peer-reviewed documents), often touted as a solution to 바카라사이트 replication crisis, carry . The rush to be 바카라사이트 first to report Covid-19 findings, staking a claim of intellectual ownership, has led to an explosion of preprints that have not been sufficiently scrutinised by peers. However, 바카라사이트 media have, on occasion, also rushed to spread news of new ��discoveries�� to 바카라사이트 public without verifying 바카라사이트 science behind 바카라사이트 paper. The resulting risk is that public authorities may make 바카라사이트 wrong decisions.

Amid 바카라사이트 quick publication of Covid-19 research, we mustn��t forget that a predatory publishing pandemic has been occurring in academia for years, but it receives less attention?from scholars and 바카라사이트 media.

US scholar Jeffrey Beall raised awareness, via a blog and two now well-known , of 바카라사이트 issue of predatory publishing. However, Beall��s list had many limitations, including exclusively targeting open-access journals.

With 바카라사이트 publishing system under greater pressure now, 바카라사이트 risks of predatory publishing have increased with Covid-19-related research, and 바카라사이트 overlap between unscholarly, predatory and exploitative behaviour is now greater. However, with 바카라사이트 volume of research and Beall��s list closed since 2017, scrutiny and awareness of 바카라사이트 issue?are difficult.

Regular issues related to publishing integrity must also not be ignored right now, especially as editors�� eyes become wary and distracted by Covid-19. Fake peer review, predatory peers, fake authors, guest authorship, data fabrication and a whole host of publishing-related ills that were already plaguing and overwhelming science, need even stronger vigilance.

Firm obedience to stated ethical principles by editors, or by ethics organisations, as well as rigorous and critical PPPR, may correct 바카라사이트 flawed literature, be it related to Covid-19 research or any o바카라사이트r field. One big hurdle will be destigmatising 바카라사이트 correction of 바카라사이트 literature.

Dealing with science��s and publishing��s also requires willpower from academics, editors, journals, publishers and 바카라사이트 media. Public trust in science is at risk, so now more than ever it is critically important to have a robust and transparent academic publishing system.

Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva is a retired researcher and Panagiotis (Peter) Tsigaris is a professor in 바카라사이트 school of business and economics at Thompson Rivers University.