Scientific rot: Unsustainable publishing practices threatens trust in medicine

Espen Heen^{1

2}, Henrik Vogt¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Community Medicine and Global Health, Institute of Health and Society, Medical Faulty of the University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
² Department of Nursing, Health and Laboratory Science, Faculty of Health, Welfare and Organisation, Ostfold University College, Fredrikstad, Norway.

Editorial

Espen Heen et al. J Eval Clin Pract. 2024 Sep.

. 2024 Sep;30(6):941-944.

doi: 10.1111/jep.13989. Epub 2024 Apr 7.

Espen Heen^{1

2}, Henrik Vogt¹

¹ Department of Community Medicine and Global Health, Institute of Health and Society, Medical Faulty of the University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
² Department of Nursing, Health and Laboratory Science, Faculty of Health, Welfare and Organisation, Ostfold University College, Fredrikstad, Norway.

No abstract available

Keywords: academia; medical science; publishing; research ethics; research integrity; technology.

References

1. Pubmed [Internet]. US National Library of Medicine and National Center for Biotechnology Information; 2004. Accessed May 08, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
1. Landhuis E. Scientific literature: information overload. Nature. 2016;535(7612):457‐458.
1. Pranckutė R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: the Titans of bibliographic information in today's academic world. Publications. 2021;9(1):12.
1. Severin A, Low N. Readers beware! Predatory journals are infiltrating citation databases. Int J Public Health. 2019;64(8):1123‐1124.
1. Cabell's international predatory reports. 2023. http://www2.cabells.com/about-predatory