Study 1: Investigating Country-Specific Perceptions of Predatory Journals and Their Impact on Scholarly Integrity: A Systematic Review

A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases on February 7th, 2024, in line with PRISMA guidelines. The focus was solely on identifying studies that examined the unique experiences and interventions associated with predatory journals in distinct national contexts. The analysis included a presentation of quantitative results and a thematic examination of qualitative data.

Results A total of 40 articles covering 19 countries were included. Twenty-four countries (60%) were in Asia, 11 (27.5%) in Africa, 2 (5%) in Europe, and 1 (2.5%) each in Australia, North America, and South America. Although not all articles cited Beall's list to identify predatory journals, thematic analysis showed consistent topics across various definitions and Beall's themes.

Our analysis identified factors affecting academic publishing perceptions globally, highlighting publication pressure, predatory practices, and policy impacts on ethics and standards. Conclusion This systematic review examined the literature on predatory publishing and identified the leading countries in the fight against these predatory publications. This analysis underscores a complex interplay of factors affecting academic publishing globally, from the push towards predatory journals as a response to publishing pressures, to the critical role of government and institutional frameworks.