Most respondents (120/145, 82.7%) agreed/strongly agreed that the decision to accept a manuscript should not be influenced by publication charges, but 50% (56/112) indicated that they “didn’t know” how publishing costs were supported. Submit now Latest COVID-19 RESEARCH High prevalence of insomnia among COVID-19 medical staff A first-of-its-kind study found that more than a third of medical staff dealing … Obviously, not endorsing a rejection is tantamount to acceptance. Respondents were given ~15 min to complete the survey, which was then collected.Responses were numbered and results entered into an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, U.S.).

Differences were considered statistically significant when Free-text definitions of “predatory journal” were grouped thematically using the general criteria published on Beall’s list for predatory journals.A total of 145 participants completed the survey (Table Responses were summarized for each of the 14 statements about open-access and subscription journals (Figure A significantly lower proportion of faculty (vs postdocs, graduate students, and residents) indicated that open access was an important factor in deciding where to publish (Figure More than half of graduate students (34/57, 60%) and postdocs (9/17, 53%) agreed or strongly agreed that open-access and subscription-based journals upheld similar ethical standards, whereas 52% (11/21) of faculty and 48% (13/27) of residents indicated that they did not know (Thirty-four of 142 (23.9%) respondents were aware of the DOAJ; 7/143 (4.8%) were aware of Beall’s list, 33/143 (23.0%) were aware of the term “predatory journal”, and 24/142 (16.9%) were aware of the Of the 145 respondents, 116 (80.0%) defined the term “predatory journal” (Table Based on our survey results, many or most prospective authors in this cohort, consisting largely of trainees, were unaware of predatory journals or of potential differences among journal models that may be important when selecting a journal for publication.

As an EIC myself, I have several times rejected manuscripts despite positive reviewer comments, because of deficiencies that were identified by the handling associate editor or myself. Science journalism by Leonid Schneider, on research integrity and academic publishing in life sciences and biomedicineThe Lausanne-based publishing house Frontiers, founded by the neuroscientists Henry and Kamila Markram, has been added to the Beall’s List of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers. While still in his post, Molnár protested about the unrejectable manuscript to the“once a paper is sent for peer-review, we want to give the authors the chance to discuss with the reviewers in the interactive review stage. Indeed it is the size and quality of the Frontiers editorial (chief and assoc. His effort simply trashes the work of many dedicated scientists who put their integirty at a premium whether editors or authors associated with the journal. Frontiers maybe makes it clearer. “For each manuscript submitted, every author needs to electronically complete and sign the COI form provided by ICMJE [], and all completed COI forms need to be submitted with the manuscript”. Some Frontiers editors I communicated with were quite content with the publisher. Much of the novel “Brave New World” is worth quoting. Im Jahr 2015 wurden die wissenschaftlichen Herausgeber der Zeitschriften Frontiers in Medicine und Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine von ihren Ämtern entbunden, nachdem sie sich darüber beschwert hatten, dass Unternehmensmitarbeiter sich in ihre Entscheidungen einmischten und die Grundprinzipien für medizinische Publikationen verletzten. The guidelines for manuscript submission are the same for both.