Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 6 Editors and staff

From: Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison

   Predatory, N = 93, n (%) Open Access, N = 99, n (%) Subscription-based, N = 100, n (%)
Named Editor-in-Chief Yes 71 (76.34) 82 (82.83) 91 (91.00)
Formal editorial board named Yes 60 (64.52) 92 (92.93) 72 (72.00)
If yes, number of members (median, IQR) 23 (14–37) 32.5 (22–50) 27.5 (16.5–62)
Composition of journal staff Managing/handling editor 22 (23.66) 18 (18.18) 41 (41.00)
Associate editor 30 (32.26) 47 (47.47) 68 (68.00)
Academic editor 0 (0) 0 (0) 1(1.00)
Statistical editor 2 (2.15) 4 (4.04) 20 (20.00)
Editorial staff 8 (8.60) 7 (7.07) 19 (19.00)
Othera 43 (46.24) 45 (45.45) 75 (75.00)
None of the above 26 (27.96) 24 (24.24) 3 (3.00)
Validity checkb,c Legitimate 24/90 (26.67) 95/98 (96.94) 97/97 (100.00)
False/made up 41/90 (45.56) 2/98 (2.04) 1/97 (1.03)
Used without permission 66/90 (73.33) 2/98 (2.04) 1/97 (1.03)
Institutional affiliation indicatedc Editor-in-Chief 40/71 (56.33) 71/82 (86.59) 57/91 (62.64)
Editors/staff 42/67 (62.69) 56/75 (74.67) 48/97 (49.48)
Editorial board members 48/60 (80.00) 81/92 (88.04) 31/72 (43.06)
  1. a163 different terms were described, e.g., Editorial office, co-editors, editor(s), deputy editors, acting editor, acting deputy editor, assistant managing editor
  2. bAssessors were asked to perform a Google search of the Editor-in-Chief and two other randomly selected editors/staff/board members along with their affiliation (if provided) and make a subjective assessment of whether the names appear to be legitimate, false/made up, used without permission. Assessments were based on searches through online profiles (i.e., LinkedIn, faculty bio, etc.) for mention of journal affiliation; categories not distinct since judgments based on multiple editors
  3. cDenominator of fractions indicates the number of journals where the variable concerned was relevant