ABSTRACT
A retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate open-access journals
in obstetrics and gynaecology, published between 2011 and 2019. Journals were classified
based on their registration in open-access journal directories. Of 176 journals, 47
were not registered. Journals registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals
(DOAJ) demonstrated good overall quality, and their journal metrics were significantly
higher than those of non-registered journals or journals registered in other directories.
The lack of editor names and indexing information on a journal's website are the most
distinctive features of non-registered journals. Non-registration in an open-access
journal directory indicates a lack of transparency and may ultimately indicate that
a journal is predatory.
RÉSUMÉ
Une étude observationnelle rétrospective a été menée pour évaluer les revues en libre
accès en obstétrique et gynécologie publiées entre 2011 et 2019. Les revues ont été
classées en fonction de leur inscription dans les répertoires de revues en libre accès.
Sur 176 revues, 47 n’étaient pas inscrites. Les revues inscrites dans le répertoire
des revues en libre accès (Directory of Open Access Journals, ou DOAJ) se sont révélées
avoir une bonne qualité globale et leurs résultats, selon les critères d’évaluation,
étaient significativement plus élevés que ceux des revues non inscrites ou inscrites
dans d'autres répertoires. L'absence de nom de rédacteur en chef et l'omission de
l'information d'indexation sur le site Web d'une revue sont les caractéristiques les
plus distinctives des revues non inscrites. La non-inscription dans un répertoire
de revues en libre accès indique un manque de transparence et peut finalement indiquer
qu'il s'agit d'une revue prédatrice.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology CanadaAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
REFERENCES
- For the sake of inquiry and knowledge – the inevitability of open access.New Engl J Med. 2013; 368: 785-787
- Open access to scientific articles: a review of benefits and challenges.Intern Emerg Med. 2017; 12: 247-253
- Predatory journals and junk meetings.J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019; 41: 579-580
- The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics.Med Health Care Philos. 2017; 20: 163-170
- Defining predatory journals and responding to the threat they pose: a modified Delphi consensus process.BMJ Open. 2020; 10e035561
- Predatory journals: ban predators from the scientific record.Nature. 2016; 534: 326
- Predatory' open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics.BMC Med. 2015; 13: 230
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 25, 2021
Footnotes
Disclosures: Eva Suarthana was supported by the Academic Enrichment Fund of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGill University, Montréal, QC.
All authors have indicated they meet the journal's requirements for authorship.
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
