nach oben

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)

Erschienen in:

07.07.2021 | Brief Report

Jourchain: using blockchain to avoid questionable journals

verfasst von: Mehdi Dadkhah, Fariborz Rahimnia, Sina Rafati Niya, Glenn Borchardt

Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) | Ausgabe 3/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Scholarly publishing currently is faced by an upsurge in low-quality, questionable “predatory/hijacked” journals published by those whose only goal is profit. Although there are discussions in the literature warning about them, most provide only a few suggestions on how to avoid these journals. Most solutions are not generalizable or have other weaknesses. Here, we use a novel information technology, i.e., blockchains, to expose and prevent the problems produced by questionable journals. Thus, this work presented here sheds light on the advantages of blockchain for producing safe, fraud-free scholarly publishing.

Gogtay N, Bavdekar S (2019) Predatory journals-can we stem the rot? J Postgrad Med 65:129CrossRef

Shamseer L, Moher D, Maduekwe O et al (2017) Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison. BMC Med 15:1–14CrossRef

Butler D (2013) Sham journals scam authors: con artists are stealing the identities of real journals to cheat scientists out of publishing fees. Nature 495:421–423CrossRef

Jalalian M, Dadkhah M (2015) The full story of 90 hijacked journals from August 2011 to June 2015. Geographica Pannonica 19:73–87CrossRef

Dadkhah M, Borchardt G (2016) Hijacked journals: an emerging challenge for scholarly publishing. Aesthetic Surg J 36:739–741. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjw026CrossRef

Jalalian M (2014) Hijacked journals are attacking the reliability and validity of medical research. Electron Physician 6:925PubMedPubMedCentral

Jalalian M, Mahboobi H (2014) Hijacked journals and predatory publishers: is there a need to re-think how to assess the quality of academic research? Walailak Journal of Science and Technology (WJST) 11:389–394

Bohannon J (2015) How to hijack a journal. Science 350:903. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.350.6263.903CrossRefPubMed

Dadkhah M (2016) New types of fraud in the academic world by cyber criminals. J Adv Nurs 72:2951–2953CrossRef

10.

Dadkhah M, Maliszewski T (2015) Hijacked journals-threats and challenges to countries’ scientific ranking. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 7:281–288CrossRef

11.

Dadkhah M, Sutikno T, Jazi MD, Stiawan D (2015) An introduction to journal phishings and their detection approach. Telkomnika 13:373CrossRef

12.

Beall J (2012) Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature 489:179–179CrossRef

13.

Beall J (2017) What I learned from predatory publishers. Biochemia medica: Biochemia medica 27:273–278CrossRef

14.

Beall J (2019) Scholarly open-access publishing. In: A Guide to the Scientific Career. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp 377–388

15.

Dadkhah M, Borchardt G, Lagzian M, Bianciardi G (2017) Academic journals plagued by bogus impact factors. Publ Res Q 33:183–187CrossRef

16.

Gutierrez FR, Beall J, Forero DA (2015) Spurious alternative impact factors: the scale of the problem from an academic perspective. BioEssays 37:474–476CrossRef

17.

Jalalian M (2015) The story of fake impact factor companies and how we detected them. Electron Physician 7:1069PubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Jalalian M, Mahboobi H (2013) New corruption detected: bogus impact factors compiled by fake organizations. Electron Physician 5:685PubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Oermann MH, Wrigley J, Nicoll LH et al (2020) Integrity of databases for literature searches in nursing: avoiding predatory journals. ANS Advances in Nursing Science

20.

Dadkhah M, Lagzian M, Borchardt G (2017) Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review. Journal of cell communication and signaling 11:181–185CrossRef

21.

Dadkhah M, Bianciardi G (2016) Ranking predatory journals: solve the problem instead of removing it! Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin 6:1CrossRef

22.

Alrawadieh Z (2020) Publishing in predatory tourism and hospitality journals: mapping the academic market and identifying response strategies. Tour Hosp Res 20:72–81CrossRef

23.

Memon AR (2019) Revisiting the term predatory open access publishing. Journal of Korean medical science 34:

24.

Memon AR (2017) Publish or perish: a sign of caution for authors to avoid predatory journals. J Pak Med Assoc 67:822–823PubMed

25.

Shahri MA, Jazi MD, Borchardt G, Dadkhah M (2018) Detecting hijacked journals by using classification algorithms. Sci Eng Ethics 24:655–668

26.

Dadkhah M, Stefanutti C (2015) Hijacked journals are emerging as a challenge for scholarly publishing. Pol Arch Med Wewn 125:783–784PubMed

27.

Memon AR (2019) Hijacked journals: a challenge unaddressed to the developing world. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association 69:1413–1415PubMed

28.

Dadkhah M, Seno SAH, Borchardt G (2017) Current and potential cyber attacks on medical journals; guidelines for improving security. Eur J Intern Med 38:25–29CrossRef

29.

Kendall G (2021) Beall’s legacy in the battle against predatory publishers. Learned Publishing

30.

da Silva JT (2017) Caution with the continued use of Jeffrey Beall’s “predatory” open access publishing lists. AME Medical Journal 2:

31.

Dadkhah M, Lagzian M, Rahimnia F, Kimiafar K Users’ perception of medical blockchain. Adv Pharm Bull

32.

Crosby M, Pattanayak P, Verma S, Kalyanaraman V (2016) Blockchain technology: beyond bitcoin. Applied. Innovation 2:71

33.

Swan M (2015) Blockchain: blueprint for a new economy. O’Reilly Media, Inc

34.

Nofer M, Gomber P, Hinz O, Schiereck D (2017) Blockchain. Business & Information. Syst Eng 59:183–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0467-3CrossRef

35.

Bashir I (2017) Mastering blockchain. Packt Publishing Ltd

36.

Higham DJ (2005) Google PageRank as mean playing time for pinball on the reverse web. Appl Math Lett 18:1359–1362CrossRef

37.

Elliott K (2008) The who, what, where, when, and why of WHOIS: privacy and accuracy concerns of the WHOIS database. SMU Sci & Tech L Rev 12:141

38.

Beshyah AS, Basher M, Beshyah SA (2020) A bibliometric analysis of the international medical literature on predatory publishing. Ibnosina Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences 12:23CrossRef

39.

Mohan V (2019) On the use of blockchain-based mechanisms to tackle academic misconduct. Research Policy 48:103805

40.

Niya SR, Pelloni L, Wullschleger S et al (2019) A blockchain-based scientific publishing platform. IEEE, pp 329–336

41.

Tarkhanov I, Fomin-Nilov D, Fomin M (2019) Application of public blockchain to control the immutability of data in online scientific periodicals. Library Hi Tech

42.

Tenorio-Fornés A, Jacynycz V, Llop-Vila D et al (2019) Towards a decentralized process for scientific publication and peer review using blockchain and IPFS

43.

Voshmgir S (2018) https://medium.com/crypto3conomics/blockchain-solutions-for-scientific-publishing-ef4b4e79ae2. Accessed 20 Jan 2021

Titel: Jourchain: using blockchain to avoid questionable journals
verfasst von: Mehdi Dadkhah
Fariborz Rahimnia
Sina Rafati Niya
Glenn Borchardt
Publikationsdatum: 07.07.2021
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) / Ausgabe 3/2022
Print ISSN: 0021-1265
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-4362
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-021-02697-x

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Echinokokkose medikamentös behandeln oder operieren?

06.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Therapie von Echinokokkosen sollte immer in spezialisierten Zentren erfolgen. Eine symptomlose Echinokokkose kann – egal ob von Hunde- oder Fuchsbandwurm ausgelöst – konservativ erfolgen. Wenn eine Op. nötig ist, kann es sinnvoll sein, vorher Zysten zu leeren und zu desinfizieren.

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Proximale Humerusfraktur: Auch 100-Jährige operieren?

01.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Mit dem demographischen Wandel versorgt auch die Chirurgie immer mehr betagte Menschen. Von Entwicklungen wie Fast-Track können auch ältere Menschen profitieren und bei proximaler Humerusfraktur können selbst manche 100-Jährige noch sicher operiert werden.

Die „Zehn Gebote“ des Endokarditis-Managements

30.04.2024 Endokarditis Leitlinie kompakt

Worauf kommt es beim Management von Personen mit infektiöser Endokarditis an? Eine Kardiologin und ein Kardiologe fassen die zehn wichtigsten Punkte der neuen ESC-Leitlinie zusammen.

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2022

An evaluation of the effectiveness of induction programmes on foundation doctor preparedness: a rapid review of the literature

The effectiveness of virtual reality simulation as learning strategy in the acquisition of medical skills in nursing education: a systematic review

Social restrictions due to COVID-19 and the incidence of intoxicated patients in pediatric emergency department

A cross-section observational study on the seroprevalence of antibodies to COVID-19 in patients receiving opiate agonist treatment

Correction to: Defining prognostic factors in older patients with endometrial cancer