Predatory nursing journals: A case study of author prevalence and characteristics

• Published in: Nursing ethics 2021-08, Vol.28 (5), p.823-833
• Main Authors: Gabrielsson, Sebastian, Eriksson, Stefan, Godskesen, Tove
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Academic publishing; Academic staff; Case reports; Community nursing; Credibility; Fraud; Habits; Higher education; Medical education; Medical ethics; Nursing; Omvårdnad; Original Manuscripts; Predatory journals; Publication ethics; Publishing; Regulation; Research dissemination; Substandard
• ISSN: 0969-7330; 1477-0989; 1477-0989
• DOI: 10.1177/0969733020968215

Background: Predatory publishing poses a fundamental threat to the development of nursing knowledge. Previous research has suggested that authors of papers published in predatory journals are mainly inexperienced researchers from low- and middle-income countries. Less attention has been paid to contributors from high-income countries. Aim: To describe the prevalence and characteristics of Swedish authors publishing in predatory nursing journals. Design: Quantitative descriptive case study. Participants and research context: Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the academic positions and academic affiliations of the authors of 39 papers published in predatory nursing journals during 2018 and 2019. Predatory nursing journals with Swedish contributors were identified by searching public listings of papers and applying a set of criteria. Journal site archives were used to identify additional papers with Swedish authors. Ethical considerations: This study was conducted in accordance with national regulations and ethical principles of research. Results: Almost two-thirds of Swedish authors publishing in predatory nursing journals hold senior academic positions. A small group of higher education institutions account for a majority of academic affiliations. Findings suggest that higher education institutions and experienced nursing researchers from Sweden make substantial contributions to predatory nursing journals, but that predatory publication habits might be concentrated in a limited number of academics and research milieus. A year-to-year comparison indicates that the prevalence of publishing in predatory journals might be diminishing. Discussion: Swedish nurse researchers help legitimize predatory journals, thus jeopardizing the trustworthiness of academic nursing knowledge. Substandard papers in predatory journals may pass as legitimate and be used to further academic careers. Experienced researchers are misleading junior colleagues, as joint publications might become embarrassments and liabilities. Conclusion: While the academic nursing community needs to address the problem of predatory publishing, there is some hope that educational efforts might have an effect on combating predatory publishing in nursing.