Study 2: Mapping Efforts to Combat Predatory Journals Across Medical Disciplines: A Scoping Review

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was conducted using terms related to predatory publishing, with the final search completed on July 1, 2024. English-language articles addressing predatory journals within specific medical disciplines were included. A thematic analysis was carried out to synthetize definitions, awareness initiatives, and proposed solutions across specialties.

Results The initial search retrieved 4,917 articles, with 83 included after screening. The review highlighted a shared understanding of predatory journals, emphasizing issues such as poor quality, unethical publishing practices, and economic exploitation. Competitive disciplines were found to engage more actively, averaging 4.6 articles per field compared to 2.6 in less competitive areas.

Efforts to combat predatory journals focus on raising awareness, enhancing education, developing robust evaluation frameworks, maintaining vigilance and quality control, and incorporating these strategies into medical training and practice. Conclusion Competitive disciplines, driven by prestige, funding, and intense publication pressures, are at the forefront of efforts to address predatory journal practices, generating nearly twice as much research as less competitive fields.

Strategies common to all disciplines, such as raising awareness, enhancing education, developing robust evaluation frameworks, and integrating these practices into training, provide effective models to combat predatory journals.