Marilyn H Oermann1, Leslie H Nicoll2, Peggy L Chinn3, Kathleen S Ashton4, Jamie L Conklin5, Alison H Edie4, Sathya Amarasekara4, Brittany L Williams6. 1. Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC. Electronic address: marilyn.oermann@duke.edu. 2. Maine Desk LLC, Portland, ME. 3. University of Connecticut School of Nursing, Storrs, CT. 4. Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC. 5. Duke University Medical Center Library & Archives, Durham, NC. 6. Department of Psychology, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Predatory journals exist in nursing and lack the safeguards of traditional publishing practices. PURPOSE: To examine the quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals. METHOD: Randomly selected articles (n = 358) were reviewed for structural content and eight quality indicators. FINDINGS: Two-thirds (67.4%) of the articles were published between 2014 and 2016, demonstrating the acceleration of publications in predatory nursing journals. The majority (75.9%) of the articles were research reports. Most followed the IMRAD presentation of a research report but contained errors, or the study was not pertinent to the nursing discipline. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing research published in predatory journals may appear legitimate by conforming to an expected structure. However, a lack of quality is apparent, representing inadequate peer review and editorial processes. Poor quality research erodes the scholarly nursing literature.
BACKGROUND: Predatory journals exist in nursing and lack the safeguards of traditional publishing practices. PURPOSE: To examine the quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals. METHOD: Randomly selected articles (n = 358) were reviewed for structural content and eight quality indicators. FINDINGS: Two-thirds (67.4%) of the articles were published between 2014 and 2016, demonstrating the acceleration of publications in predatory nursing journals. The majority (75.9%) of the articles were research reports. Most followed the IMRAD presentation of a research report but contained errors, or the study was not pertinent to the nursing discipline. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing research published in predatory journals may appear legitimate by conforming to an expected structure. However, a lack of quality is apparent, representing inadequate peer review and editorial processes. Poor quality research erodes the scholarly nursing literature.
Authors: Marilyn H Oermann; Jordan Wrigley; Leslie H Nicoll; Leila S Ledbetter; Heather Carter-Templeton; Alison H Edie Journal: ANS Adv Nurs Sci Date: 2021 Apr-Jun 01 Impact factor: 1.824
Authors: Oliver Rudolf Herber; Caroline Bradbury-Jones; Susanna Böling; Sarah Combes; Julian Hirt; Yvonne Koop; Ragnhild Nyhagen; Jessica D Veldhuizen; Julie Taylor Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 4.615