Prospective Observational Evaluation of Predatory Journals in Critical Care Pharmacy Practice: Defining Characteristics Associated With Receiving Unsolicited Invitations to Publish

• Published in: Journal of pharmacy practice Vol. 36; no. 3; p. 494
• Main Authors: Peppard, William J, Peppard, Sarah R, Feih, Joel T, Kim, Andy K, Obenberger, Steve J, Mulvey, Ashley F, Teng, Bi Qing, Brazauskas, Ruta, Pape, Kate O, Gibson, Gabrielle A, Dzierba, Amy L, Dobesh, Paul P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.06.2023
• Subjects: Humans; Open Access Publishing; Periodicals as Topic; Pharmacy; Prospective Studies; Publishing; critical care; pharmacy; open access; publish; predatory
• ISSN: 1531-1937
• DOI: 10.1177/08971900211036091

Open-access publishing promotes accessibility to scholarly research at no cost to the reader. The emergence of predatory publishers, which exploit the author-pay model by charging substantial publication fees for publication in journals with questionable publishing processes, is on the rise. Authors are solicited through aggressive marketing tactics, though who is targeted is not well described. The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics associated with critical care pharmacists that make them targets of unsolicited invitations to publish. A prospective, observational study of critical care pharmacists was performed. Participants archived emails received by their professional email that were unsolicited invitations to submit their original work for publication in a journal (unsolicited journals). Variables were evaluated to determine which were associated with unsolicited invitations; these were compared to legitimate journals, defined as all PubMed-indexed journals in which the participants were previously published. Twenty-three pharmacist participants were included, all of whom were residency and/or fellowship trained and practicing in an academic medical center. Participants had a median of 7 years of experience since their post-graduate training, 6 years since their last change in professional email address, and 2 years since their first PubMed-indexed publication. From these participants, 136 unsolicited and 59 legitimate journals were included. The average number of invitations increased 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02-1.05) times for every additional PubMed-indexed publication ( < .001). Most unsolicited journals were considered predatory. Legitimate and unsolicited journals differed significantly. The number of previous PubMed-indexed publications strongly correlates with the likelihood of critical care pharmacists receiving unsolicited publication invitations, often from predatory journal.