Plenilske revije
Izraz "plenilske revije" je prvič uporabil Jeffrey Beall, raziskovalec in knjižničar na Univerzi Kolorado v Denverju; z izrazom je označil revije za dobiček za razliko od revij za promocijo znanstvenih podatkov. Leta 2010 je prvič objavil seznam plenilskih založnikov. Na Beallovem seznamu so potencialne, možne ali verjetno plenilske založbe odprtega dostopa. Plenilska dejavnost ne zajema le revij, ampak zajema tudi monografije, kongrese in objavo kongresnih izvlečkov (1).
Beall je prvi opisal nevarnost plenilskih revij za znanost. Večina teh revij nima recenzij ali pa so le-te lažne, tako da vedno obstoja možnost prikaza ponarejenih rezultatov raziskav namesto prave znanosti, in sicer zaradi citiranja lažnih rezultatov v priznanih revijah (2).
Plenilski založniki izkoriščajo model odprtega dostopa za svoj lasten dobiček, gre za znanost, ki je na prodaj. Namen modela izdajanja odprtega dostopa je, da lahko bralci vidijo, berejo, shranijo, kopirajo in pošiljajo članek, kar omogoča raziskovalcem, da lahko predstavijo svoje delo vsem ostalim raziskovalcem brez plačila. Plačilo postopka objave članka je šele po skrbni recenziji in njegovem sprejetju in znaša okoli 3000 ameriških dolarjev na članek vključno z vključitvijo v PubMed in arhiviranjem v repozitorij. To je »zlati odprti dostop«. V modelu »zelen odprt dostop« avtorji sami naložijo članek neposredno v repozitorij brez plačila (3).
Večina plenilskih revij izhaja v istih krajih in v njej sodelujejo avtorji, ki nujno potrebujejo objavo (4). Plenilske revije so temna plat založništva (5). Njihov pojav postaja resen problem moderne znanstvene skupnosti in ga je potrebno razumeti, če želimo v prihodnosti iztrebiti plenilske založnike in plenilske revije.
Objave v plenilskih revijah so se povečale iz 53.000 v letu 2010 na 420.000 v letu 2014, posebej v Afriki in Aziji. Objava članka v plenilski reviji je brez vrednosti, kljub dejstvu, da je lahko članek originalen. Članka ne moremo citirati, saj ni indeksiran v nobeni priznani bazi podatkov, kot je npr. PubMed. Ve-
Predatory journals
The name "predatory open access" was first used by Jeffrey Beall, researcher and librarian at the University of Colorado at Denver, to describe journals for profits and not for the promotion of scientific data. In 2010, he published the first list of predatory publishers. Beall's list includes potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers. Predatory practice includes not only journals, but also monographs, conferences and conference proceedings (1). Beall first described the danger of predatory journals for science. The majority of these journals have no or a sham peer-review, so there is always the possibility that fake research is published as real science due to citation in legitimate journals (2). Predatory publishers exploit the open-access model for their own profit, so-called science for sale. The goal of "open-access" publishing is that the readers can view, read, download, copy and distribute the paper and allows researchers to publish their work for other researchers without a fee. The article processing fee is paid after thorough peer-review and acceptance and is approximately 3000 USD per article with inclusion in PubMed and archiving in repositories. This is "gold open-access". In "green open-access" the authors upload directly to an online repository without fee (3). The majority of these journals are published in the same part of the world and from authors with a desperate need to be published (4). Predatory journals are the dark side of publishing (5). The phenomenon of predatory open-access journals is becoming a serious problem in modern scientific society and must be understood, if we want to eradicate predatory publishers and predatory journals in the future. The number of publications in predatory journals increased from 53.000 in 2010 to 420.000 in 2014, particularly in Africa and Asia. Publishing an article in a predatory journal makes it valueless, despite the fact that the article is authentic. This article should not be cited because it is not indexed in an appropriately recognized database, such as PubMed. There is always the danger that any field can become polluted with inappropriately reviewed work. Some editors have
dno obstaja nevarnost, da lahko na vseh področjih pride do pojava neprimerno recenziranega članka. Nekateri uredniki priporočajo, da priznani založniki in revije najdejo neko rešitev glede citiranja plenilskih člankov (4,6).
Dokaz nerecenziranja je primer članka D. Maziere-sa in E. Kohlerja, objavljenega v reviji International Journal of Advanced Computer Technology, z naslovom "Get me of your f****** mailing list". V besedilu članka sta avtorja naslov ponovila več stokrat, a je kljub temu bil sprejet za objavo (7). Je to moderna znanost? Je to to, kar si želimo? V letu 2015 je Moher v svojem članku analiziral 311 povabil po elektronski pošti v obdobju enega leta; vsa so bila s strani plenilskih revij (8).
Danes prejemamo veliko število elektronskih povabil k pošiljanju člankov za posebno številko revije ali k pridružitvi uredniškemu odboru pri novih neznanih revijah. Samo v zadnjih 2 tednih (od 15. aprila do 2. maja) sem prejela na svojo e-pošto 15 takšnih povabil. Vedno je bilo za postopek potrebno plačati manjši znesek, zagotovljeno je bilo recenziranje v 7 dneh ali manj in večinoma je bil postopek oddaje članka preko e-pošte uredniškega odbora. V januarju 2016 je Jeffrey Beall že šestič objavil nabor potencialnih, možnih ali verjetno plenilskih založnikov odprtega dostopa. Na seznamu je 923 založnikov, kar je 230 več kot prejšnje leto. Prav tako je objavil četrti seznam potencialnih, možnih ali verjetno plenilskih revij odprtega dostopa. Seznam obsega 882 reviji, kar pomeni povečanje za 375 revij glede na prejšnje leto. Oba seznama se sprotno obnavljata. Pred kratkim je začel objavljati še dva nova seznama, seznam podjetij, ki izračunavajo napačni impakt faktor (Misleading metrics list) in seznam revij, ki so ukradle identiteto drugi reviji (Hijacted journal list) (9).
Za nastanek plenilskih revij je več vzrokov. Uveljavljene revije odprtega dostopa so za številne avtorje predrage, zato avtorji izbirajo plenilske revije zaradi nizke cene, razlika je 3000 ameriških dolarjev v primerjavi s 100 dolarji. Drugi razlog je ta, da številni avtorji želijo objaviti svoje delo v priznanih revijah z visoko kvalitetno recenzijo, vendar po številnih zavrnitvah članka izberejo lažjo pot. Nekateri avtorji se
recommended that legitimate publishers and journals should find a solution to predatory citation (4,6). Proof of the lack of peer-review can be found in the article by D. Mazieres and E. Kohler published in the International Journal of Advanced Computer Technology entitled "Get me off your f****** mailing list". In this work they repeated the article title in the text several hundred times and it was accepted for publication (7). Is this modern science? Is this what we want? In 2015, Moher published an article which included 311 invitations by email during a period of one year all from predatory journals (8).
Nowadays, a large number of e-mails are received with an invitation to submit articles for an upcoming special issue or to join the editorial board of new unknown journals. In the last 2 weeks (April 15th to May 2nd 2016) more than 15 such invitations I received. These invitations always involved a small author processing fee which must be submitted with a guarantee of peerreview within 7 days or less and in most cases the submission process was by email to the editorial office. In January 2016, Jeffrey Beall formally released the sixth annual list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers. 923 publishers are on the list this year, an increase of 230 compared with last year. He also released the fourth annual list of potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals. The list includes 882 journals, an increase of 375 in the last year. Both lists are continuously updated. Recently he started two new lists, a misleading metrics list which includes companies that calculate false impact factors and a hijacked journal list which includes journals that have stolen another journal's identity (9). There are many reasons why predatory journals exist. Legitimate open-access journals are expensive for many authors, thus authors choose predatory journals due to their low fee (3000 USD compared to 100 USD). Another reason is that many authors want to publish their work in high quality peer-reviewed journals, but some are frustrated when their manuscripts are rejected several times. Some authors knowingly use predatory publications in order to achieve promotions, grants and employment. Their work can be published in these journals simply by paying a fee to the predatory journal.
zavestno odločijo za plenilsko objavo v želji po napredovanju, nagradi ali zaposlitvi. V teh revijah lahko svoje delo objavijo na enostaven način s plačilom plenilski reviji.
Kako lahko spoznamo plenilsko revijo, kateri so opozorilni znaki, da se takšni situaciji izognemo? Lahko uporabimo »črni seznam«, kot je Beallov seznam, ali pa »beli seznam« priznanih revij, ki jih objavlja Direktorij za revije odprtega dostopa (9). Izberemo revijo, ki je na seznamu združenj, kjer so zajete le priznane revije, revije, ki so objavljene na seznamu Direktorija za odrti dostop. To je on-line seznam revij, ki zajema več kot 11.000 revij, ki so visoke kvalitete, odrtega dostopa, recenzirane. Iz »belega seznama« izberemo revije na posameznih seznamih: Journal Guide - seznam revij po področjih, Ulrich's Web Global Serials Directory - omejen seznam revij odprtega dostopa ali dostop s članarino, Web of science Journal Citation Reports - multidisciplinarni pokazatelj revij z impakt faktorjem in Scopus - baza izvlečkov in citiranosti.
Plenilske revije imajo nekatere skupne lastnosti: delež sprejetih prispevkov je zelo visok, avtorji so povabljeni k oddaji članka s strani urednika, postopki recenzije so slabi ali jih ni, plačilo za članek je pred sprejetjem članka v objavo (10). Povprečno cena na članek je okoli 100 dolarjev, članek je objavljen v roku 2 do 3 mesecev. V uredniškem odboru so akademiki brez njihove privolitve ali pa so izmišljeni. Založniki uporabljajo ime ali spletno stran, ki je podobna priznani reviji, in ponarejen impakt faktor. Obstajajo še drugi znaki, da je revija plenilska, tako na primer napake pri črkovanju, slovnici, spletna stran z zelo nizko resolucijo, baza za citiranje, ki ni Thomas Reuters Impact Factor, in pošiljanje uredništvu po e-pošti (11).
Jocalyn Clark je predlagala 5 točk za zavarovanje pred plenilskimi revijami, na kratko (12):
1.	Preveri, če je revija na Beallovem seznam.
2.	Ali je revija na belem seznamu Direktorija za revije odprtega dostopa?
3.	Ali je založnik član organizacije, ki je odgovorna za izboljšanje etične integritete v založništvu, kot je Odbor za etiko objavljanja (COPE)?
4.	Ne zaupaj vsem podatkom o reviji, preveri, če je
How can predatory journals be identified and what are the warning signs to avoid these situations? A "blacklist" such is Beall's list can be used or a whitelist of legitimate journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (9).
Journals included in lists produced by associations in which only reputable journals are listed should be chosen, such as the Directory of Open Access - an online journal list with more than 11,000 journals of high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals or a "whitelist" such as the Journal Guide - a journal list for each discipline, Ulrich's Web Global Serials Directory - limited to peer-reviewed journals with open access or subscription-based, Web of Science Journal Citation Reports - a multidisciplinary index of journals with impact factors, and Scopus - an abstract and citation database. Predatory journals have some common characteristics. The acceptance rate is very high, the authors are invited by the publisher to submit an article, minimal or no peer-review process, and article fees to be paid before the paper is accepted (10). The average charge for an article is approximately 100 USD and the article is published within 2 to 3 months. The editorial board includes the names of academics without their permission or fake academics. The publishers use the name or a website similar to established journals and fake the impact factor. There are also other signs that suggest a journal is predatory such are errors related to spelling and grammar on the homepage with very low-resolution graphics, mention of a database citation score that is not a Thomson Reuters Impact Factor, and a submission system by email to the editorial office (11). Jocalyn Clark suggests the following 5-point plan to protect against predatory journals:
1.	Check if the journal is on Beall's List.
2.	Is the journal listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals whitelist.
3.	Is the publisher a member of organizations committed to enhancing ethical integrity in publishing, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
4.	Do not necessary believe any indexing claims by a journal; check to see if they are present in respected databases such as PubMed.
5.	Does the journal make efforts towards transpar-
prisotna v priznani bazi podatkov, kot je PubMed. 5. Ali je pri reviji jasno opisan postopek recenzije in
postopek objave? Plenilski založniki in plenilske revije so naraščajoč problem tudi v bližnji prihodnosti. Avtorji morajo vedno izbrati visoko kvalitetno recenzirane revije s strogim recenzijskim postopkom, preden je članek poslan v tisk. Ponarejena raziskava in ponarejeni podatki prispevajo k napačnim rezultatom in zaključkom, kar pa se v znanosti ne sme tolerirati. Vsak izdajatelj ali uredniški odbor mora prispevati k zaščiti uredniške integritete in standardov. Znanost ni na trgu in se ne more meriti s komercialnimi ali kakršnokoli drugimi interesi, ne s strani založnika, ne s strani avtorjev.
Prof. dr. Dušica Pahor, dr. med. odgovorna urednica
O tempora! O mores!	O, ~asi! O morale!
Cicero
Ubi lucrum es, ibi esse vix audete fides. Kjer je korist, tam poštenost težko upa priti.
ency, such as clearly describing its peer-review and publication process (12). To conclude, predatory publishers and predatory journals are a growing problem and will remain so in the future. Authors must always select a high quality peer-reviewed journal with a serious peer-review process before sending a manuscript to the publisher. Fake research and fake data contribute to false results and conclusions, and must not be tolerated in science. Every publisher or editorial board of legitimate journals must contribute to the protection of editorial integrity and standards. Science is not on the market and cannot be managed by commercial or any other interests or by publishers and authors.
Prof. Dušica Pahor, MD, PhD, Editor-in-Chief
O tempora! O mores! Oh the times! Oh the manners! Cicero
Ubi lucrum es, ibi esse vix audete fides.
Where there is benefit, there fairness hardly makes its
way.
LITERATURA / REFERENCES
1.	J Beall. "Predatory" open-access scholarly publishers. Charleston Advis 2010; 11:10-7.
2.	J Beall. Medical publishing triage - Chronicling predatory open access publishers. Ann Med Surg 2013; 2:47-9.
3.	B Perbal. APC: The toll raod to continued high quality communication. Cell Commun Signal 2004;2: 7.
4.	J Roberts. Predatory Journals: think before you you submit. Headache. 2016; 56(4): 618-21.
5.	S Natarajan, AG Nair. Fake-books" - predatory journals: The dark side of publishing. Indian J Ophthalmol 2016; 64(2): 107-8.
6.	J Beall. Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journalsmAnn R Coll Surg Engl 2016; 98:77-9.
7.	URL= (https://scholarlyoa.com/2014/11/20/bogus-journal-accepts-profanity-laced-anti-spam-paper) Accessed February 11, 2016
8.	D Moher, A Srivastava. You are invited to submit... BMC Med 2015;13:180.
9.	Bells list (http://scholarlyoa.com/)
10.	D Moher, E Moher. Stop predatory publishers now: Act collaboratively. Ann Intern Med 2016; doi:10.7326/M15-3015.
11.	L Shamser, D Moher, O Maduekwe, et al. Compa-rision of characteristics potential predatory journals with subscription and open accsess journal. A cross sectional study. Reward Equatot Conference. Edinburgh. September 28-30, 2015.
12.	URL= (https:// http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2015/01/ 19/jocalyn-clarc-how-to-avoid-predatory-journals-a-five-point-plan/) Accessed February 11, 2016