Publish and Perish: Predatory Journals in Medical Science

It starts innocuously enough – an email praising your latest research and offering a quick publication opportunity in a journal that appears legitimate, albeit unfamiliar. The flattery is well-crafted, the journal title closely resembles one you recognize, and the promise of rapid peer review and visibility is alluring. Or, perhaps, the letter invites you to offer a plenary talk at an international conference. But something isn't quite right. You are an anesthesiologist, yet the letter says: “You are warmly invited to speak at the 2ndEuropean Congress on Recycling and Waste Management, taking place on November 6-7, 2025, in Vienna, Austria. Theme: Reimagine Waste, Restore the Earth.” “We are in need of one article for successful release of Textile Engineering & Fashion Technology? Is it possible for you to support us with your page opinion/case report or mini review, we hope 2 page article isn't time taken for eminent people like you.” “You Can Publish Your Any Kind Of The Manuscript Such As Journal on Cataract and Refractive Surgery. We are happy to collaborate with you and kindly submit your Articles in our journal.” Huh? “Good Day. Hope this mail finds you well in these tough times. Journal of Forensic Science & Criminology is an open-access highly cited journal dedicated to disseminating research findings in the broad domains of forensic science and criminology.” “We contacted you on 25th of May, regarding a Special Issue entitled “Advances in Pig Genomic Resources”, to be published in the journal Genes (ISSN 2073-4425, IF 2.8). Dr. Ruimin Qiao is serving as Guest Editor for this issue. Based on your expertise in this field, we think you could make an excellent contribution.” “Greetings SL Shafer!! We hope you're doing well. We've sent a few invitations regarding article submission to Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases, and we'd appreciate hearing from you. Are you interested in contributing an article by June 10, 2025? We'd be honored to feature your work, and as part of our support for scholars, we're offering a reduced publication fee of $1,199.” “Greetings! We hope this message finds you in good health and high spirits. We're excited to invite you as a distinguished speaker to the Public Health Care Conference Global Edition-2025.” “On behalf of Committee Members and Meghaz Meetings, I would warmly welcome you to be a Plenary Speaker at International Experts Summit on Animal Science, Veterinary Medicine and Biosystems Engineering.” These are verbatim quotes from emails received by members of the ASA Monitor Editorial Board and readers of the ASA Community Forum. They open a window into the unsavory world of predatory publishing (asamonitor.pub/3FzYxOZ). Henry Journal of Anesthesia & Analgesia I (SLS) went down a rabbit hole with a predatory journal during my tenure as editor-in-chief of Anesthesia & Analgesia. In 2015, every member of the A&A Editorial Board received this invitation (copied verbatim): Dear Dr: The Journal of Anesthesia & Analgesia welcomes you! Henry Publishing Group introduces you the Journal of Anesthesia & Analgesia. The journal is newly launched with an open access initiative to serve the scientific community globally. We welcome eminent scientific personalities, who are expertise in this field as editors to form the editorial board. Based on your expertise and contributions in this field, we request you to associate with us as an editor. We would be happy if you could serve as an editor and help us for the growth and development of the journal. Kindly go through the URL for journal online, http://www.henrypublishinggroup.com/index.php/anesthesia. We are awaiting for your response regarding your opinion towards the position. If you are interested, please mail us your acceptance along with an updated CV, summary of research expertise and biography at [email protected] Please let us know if you have any queries regarding this. I look forward to hear from you soon. Hope to associate with you a long lasting and scientific relationship with you With kind regards Lisa Marra Unit 3, 830 Manukau Rd, Rayal Oak, Auckland - 1061, New Zealand I clicked on the above links (which no longer work). About 30 journals were listed, including one called Anesthesia & Analgesia. None had ever published an article. The address (on Royal Oak, not Rayal Oak) led to a residential building in New Zealand. Their editorial board listed numerous academic anesthesiologists who were duped into signing on to the editorial board. Attorneys for the International Anesthesia Research Society sent warning letters about trademark infringement, and the Henry Journal of Anesthesia & Analgesia was renamed Henry Journal of Anesthesia & Perioperative Management. Henry Publishing is still around (see henrypublishers.com). The Journal of Anesthesia & Perioperative Management has published a total of 12 articles since my 2015 encounter (asamonitor.pub/4l5CgYk). I contacted several colleagues listed as members of the editorial board of the Journal of Anesthesia & Perioperative Management (asamonitor.pub/3ZqzowJ). None of them agreed to be on their editorial board. Several emailed the journal office to remove their names. The emails bounced. Henry Publishing now lists a U.S. address in Virginia (41341 Red Birch Dr., Aldie, VA, 20105). The address does not exist. There is a “41341 Red Birch Court” in Aldie, Virginia. Res ipsa loquitur. Beall's List The term “predatory publishing” was coined by Jeffrey Beall, a library scientist at the University of Colorado (asamonitor.pub/43EVY7l). The term has since been adopted to describe a litany of unscrupulous practices in publications and meetings (asamonitor.pub/3FzYxOZ). Beall has been critical of Open Access because the author-supported financial model is responsible for the rise of fake publications (Nature 2012;489(7415):179; Nature 2016;534:326). Beall published a list of predatory publishers that (not surprisingly) came to be known as “Beall's list” (asamonitor.pub/4kCa4wa). Both Beall and the University of Colorado were threatened with lawsuits for defamation. Beall eventually removed the list from his blog. Beall's list was used in several sting operations. In 2013, John Bohannon wrote 304 fake scientific papers and submitted them to open access journals (Science 2013;342:60-5; asamonitor.pub/4l1Wq5o). For journals that reached a decision, 82% accepted a paper of scientific gibberish. Even some established publishers failed to review his submission. “Journals published by Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer, and Sage all accepted my bogus paper,” wrote Bohannon. In 2015, four Polish scientists created a fake person, Anna O. Szust (“fraud” in Polish) (Nature 2017;543:481-3). Dr. Szust's CV listed no articles in academic journals, no experience as a reviewer, and book chapters that did not exist published by invented publishers. The scientists sent Dr. Szust's CV, which demonstrated zero scholarship, to 360 journals. The journals were drawn evenly from Journal Citation Reports, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Beall's list. No journal indexed in Journal Citation Reports appointed her as an editor. Eight journals listed in the DOAJ and 40 journals on Beall's list appointed her as an editor. In four cases, she was immediately appointed editor-in-chief! In 2016, Professor Burkhard Morgenstern at the University of Göttingen was so annoyed by fake editorial board invitations that he created “Hoss Cartwright, PhD” (remember Bonanza?) (asamonitor.pub/4dZ0px6). Dr. Cartwright's CV included “1995-2000 Studies of Dunnowhat, University of Bovine Research, Virginia” and “2003-2005, Postdoc, City Jail, Virginia City.” His current position was “Senior Ranch Manager.” Dr. Cartwright applied to multiple editorial boards, and he was accepted by many (asamonitor.pub/4l2Y1rE; asamonitor.pub/43EEJD7). For example, the Journal of Advances in Biology was happy for him to join the editorial board, provided he purchased a yearly membership in the Council for Innovative Research. Dr. Cartwright is still listed on the editorial board of the Journal of Agriculture & Life Sciences (asamonitor.pub/43WEuSR). You can't make this stuff up! Jeffrey Beall retired in 2018. His original list can still be found online (beallslist.net), along with a continually curated list (asamonitor.pub/4kH42um). The DOAJ was created, in part, to counter the impression that open access publishing is intrinsically fraudulent (doaj.org). Attesting to the scale of the problem, the DOAJ has an extensive list of predatory journals falsely claiming to be whitelisted (asamonitor.pub/443AboZ). Rise of the predators The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines predatory publishing as the systematic for-profit publication of purportedly scholarly content (in journals, articles, or conference proceedings), in a deceptive or fraudulent way and without any regard for quality assurance (asamonitor.pub/43J3Epi). The motive is money, facilitated by the shift from reader-supported publication to author-supported publication (J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2020;26:956-60; PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377). As seen in the example of the Henry Journal of Anesthesia & Analgesia, predatory publishers impersonate reputable journals, fabricate impact factors and indexing claims, falsely list editors, and invite authors under false pretenses (PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377). In 2021, it was estimated that over 15,000 such journals existed globally (N Z Med J 2025;138:9-12). Articles are peer reviewed or fail to publish at all after collecting fees (N Z Med J 2025;138:9-12). Predatory conferences are no different. A reporter for Nature attended the 5th Global Nephrology, Urology, and Kidney Failure Congress in London, hosted by OMICS International (Nature 2024;631:921-3). The conference occurred (some don't), with 21 people in a hotel room, all expecting different conferences. She “found it to be shambolic.” Authors, especially those early in their careers or from underresourced institutions, are frequent targets. A 2025 study surveying 1,270 authors who had published in predatory journals revealed that 58% were unable to accurately identify such journals, despite 70% claiming awareness (ESMO Open 2020;5:e000677). Sadly, some desperate authors knowingly submit to fake journals to inflate publication lists, with positive correlation to research awards (J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2020;26:956-60). Authors can be harmed by the poor academic rigor implied by having a publication in a predatory journal. Institutional credibility is also compromised when faculty or grantees publish in disreputable venues (N Z Med J 2025;138:9-12; J Korean Med Sci 2025;40:e77). Fraudulent branding leads to confusion and mistrust even among seasoned academics, causing skepticism toward valid open access journals that operate ethically under similar financial models (N Z Med J 2025;138:9-12; J Korean Med Sci 2025;40:e77). Authors can protect themselves by taking time to investigate journals before submission (PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377). The checklist is simple: examine the website, verify indexing claims, scrutinize editorial boards, and confirm fee structures. When in doubt, consult a librarian (PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377). Medical science and clinical care suffer when poorly vetted articles are published by predatory journals. As one editorial aptly noted, in a world where “alternative facts” have gained a foothold, predatory journals represent “alternative journals” – dangerous, deceptive, and antithetical to the mission of scientific progress (Can J Surg 2021;64:E358). Red flags Predatory journals are easy to spot (PLoS Med. 2025;22:e1004542, J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2020;26:956-60). Several guidelines exist to help authors identify them (thinkchecksubmit.org; PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377;). Common hallmarks include: Aggressive solicitation: As shown in the above examples, unsolicited invitations to submit research or join editorial boards are common, often targeting authors far outside the journal's stated scope Unrealistic turnaround times: Promises of publication within several days, which is unrealistic if review is conducted by true domain experts Opaque fee structures: Legitimate open access journals disclose publication fees up front. Fake journals usually do not disclose fee structures Lack of editorial transparency: Reputable journals list editorial board members with verifiable affiliations. Predatory journals may name fictitious individuals or list real academics without their consent (as shown in the above account of Henry Publishing) Dubious indexing claims: Journals falsely claim inclusion in MEDLINE, Web of Science, or fabricated metrics, or claim to be indexed in DOAJ. The DOAJ and Beall's list offer useful whitelists and blacklists, respectively. However, no list can replace a thorough and skeptical review (J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2020;26:956-60; PLoS Comput Biol 2021;17:e1009377). Institutions have an important role in combating predatory publishing by: Embedding awareness campaigns into faculty development programs, particularly for early-career researchers Conducting regular audits of faculty publishing patterns, combined with mentoring and librarian support Establishing transparent evaluation metrics and clear publication policies Basing promotion on article quality, not article quantity (PLoS Med 2025;22:e1004542). Predatory publishing and conferences thrive when struggling academics are naively judged by clueless peers, institutions, and societies based on the number of publications and presentations without regard to the merits of each paper or presentation. Individual cases can be hilarious, such as soliciting papers from anesthesiologists about pig genomics, or Dr. Hoss Cartwright appearing on the editorial board of the Journal of Agriculture & Life Sciences. It's less funny in the context of the present attack on science (Nature 2025;641:26-30; Nature 2025;642:13-14; asamonitor.pub/4dYPPqd, asamonitor.pub/4mZjmnI). Trust in science is eroded by predatory publications, fake conferences, paper mills, and outright fraud (asamonitor.pub/45mfMh1). Even though most people trust science and scientists, “lack of trust in scientists by even a small minority may affect considerations of scientific evidence in policymaking” (Nat Hum Behav 2025;9:713-30). As physicians, investigators, and scientists, we must remain vigilant to threats to the scientific enterprise. Dibash K. Das holds a PhD in molecular, cellular, and developmental biology from CUNY Graduate Center and an advanced certificate in clinical and translational investigation from Weill Cornell Medicine.