Commentary: Avoiding predatory publishing for early career ophthalmologists.

Assessing a scholar’s performance is an integral part of academia, and research publications are in the spotlight during this process.[1] The significant academic and financial implications of scientific publications have placed undue stress on the scholars.[2] The pressures to publish and then publish more with rapid turnaround times can compromise the scientific quality and ethics. It is precisely this market that predatory journals thrive upon.

The authors of the article upon which this commentary was invited have elaborately introduced the topic and listed a checklist of red flags and websites to help juvenile researchers identify predatory journals.[3] The present commentary would be bringing out certain other nuances to help the readership further.

A series of several evidence-based checklists are out there, which were designed to help researchers identify a predatory journal, and hence, minimize threats to scientific integrity. However, a lack of validity and reliability is not uncommon.[4] Well-constructed Delphi surveys involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders have shown the support for a substantial, single coherent checklist.[5] Continuing in a similar vein, there is also a need to explore the feasibility of a ‘one-stop shop’ website that consolidates all the resources like information, training, and educational materials related to predatory publishing.[5] The development of a ‘journal authenticator,’ and ‘predatory research journal observatory’ has garnered decent academic support[5] and can be potentially integrated into a single place.

The other aspect is referencing or citing papers from predatory journals, more so in the context of a systematic review or metanalysis. Infiltration by predatory articles can seriously impact the analysis and conclusions drawn by reviews. Hence, there exists a potential for formulating wrong guidelines and subsequent adverse effects on patient care. Although there are no consensus guidelines on dealing with this problem, several measures have been recommended.[67] These include checking the predatory nature of the not well-known journals before referencing, excluding predatory articles, and setting strict search limits.

An interesting aspect of academic discussion would be the right of the authors to refuse to be cited in a predatory article. While the scholars have the right to cite the references they deem fit for their article, the right of the author being cited for refusing such a citation does not exist.[8]

The identification of 51 predatory journals in ophthalmology is a matter of great concern for academia. The efforts to solicit publications from potential authors using emails and social media platforms are alarmingly rising.[9] There is an urgent need to increase awareness at multiple platforms like major conferences and university institutions. Well-planned global collaborative efforts must be initiated to curb this menace before it gets too late.