utilizingwww.22.com

EDITORIALOpenAccessTheurgetopublishmoreanditsconsequencesMohammadAbdollahi1*,ArmenYuriGasparyan2,3andSoodabehSaeidnia4Intheeraof"bigscience",allresearchers,academicsandstudentsareunderpressuretopublishmoreandtoreportmoreresearchactivitiesforsuccessfulgrantapplications,academicpromotion,andcoursegraduation.
Tomeettheever-increasingpublicationactivities,thousandsofnewpublishershavesprungupglobally,andthenumberofon-lineandsubscriptionjournalshasincreasedexponentially.
Atthesametime,temptationtopublishmoreatallcostshasledtoepidemicsofunethicalconductandinev-itableretractions,whichquestionthevalidityofcurrentevidence-base[1].
Reasonsforretractionsinclude,butnotlimitedtofraud,plagiarism,multiplesubmissionsandduplicatepublications,violationofcopyrightsandethicalnormsofresearch,andinappropriateauthorship[2].
Un-coveredcasesofmisconductandviolationofpublicationethicsareincreasingatrapidpaceduetothedigitizationandopenaccessmovementinthelasttwodecades[1].
Anditisexpectedthatthelandscapeofpublicationsandtheirindexingandcitationrecordsinbibliographicdata-baseswillchangesubstantiallyinthecomingyears.
Largeamountoffundingforresearch,publishingandarchivingactivitiescomesfrompharmaceuticalagencies,supportingindividualsandtheirresearchandacademicinstitutions.
Toooften,pharmaceuticalagencieshiremedicalwritersandprofessionalexpertsforwritingresearchreportsandguidelinesondrugsandmedicaltechnologiesproducedorpromotedbytheagencies.
Informingreadershipaboutrelationshipsbetweenauthorsandpharmaceuticalagenciesisanethicalobligation,whichshouldberegardedforthesakeoftransparencyandsafetyofpatients[3,4].
Non-disclosureofrelevantrelationshipswithpharmaisamisconductwithfar-reachinghealthcareconsequencesthatcannotbeavoidedevenaftercorrectionsorretractionsofunethicalpublications.
Theauthorshavetoexplicitlydiscloseanyconflictatthemanuscriptsub-missionbyfillingthestructuredformprovidedbytheInternationalCommitteeofMedicalJournalEditors[5].
Globaleditorialassociationskeepacloseeyeonresearchandpublicationmisconduct.
Forexample,theCommitteeonPublicationEthics(COPE)hasacollectionofappallingcasesofmisconduct,whichmayhelpavoidsimilarcasesbyimprovingawarenessamongyoungandseasonedre-searchers,authors,reviewers,andeditors[6].
Responsibil-ityforaccurateandunbiasedresearchreportingliesnotonlywithauthors,butalsowithallotherstakeholdersofscientificcommunications.
Researchandacademicinstitu-tionsareobligedtoeducatetheirauthorsandtoinformaboutpublishingethicsandconsequencesofbiasedandfraudulentpublications.
Reviewersandscienceeditors,inturn,havetocarefullyevaluatecorrectnessofresearchdataandtransparencyofauthorship,contributorship,anddisclosuresofethicalapprovals,funding,andconflictsofinterests.
Ethicalconcernsmayariseatanypointthroughoutthemanuscriptprocessingorpost-publication,andifso,responsibleevaluatorshavetoconsultrelevantguidelinesofCOPEandactaccordingly[7].
Eachcaseofmisconductshouldbediscussedinacollegiatewaywithallstakeholdersofresearchpublicationstoavoidsimilarcasesinthefuture.
Researchmisconductmaytakeavarietyofforms,whichcanbeminorormajor.
TheU.
S.
NationalScienceFoundationdistinguishedthefollowingtypesofresearchmisconduct:fabrication(reportingmade-upresults),falsifi-cation(manipulationoftheresearchmaterials,equipment,orprocesses),andplagiarism(utilizingsomeoneelse'stextorideaswithoutappropriatecrediting)[8,9].
Perhapsthemostimportantpointhereistheintention,whichleadstothemisconductandunethicalpublication(Figure1).
Intentionallymisleadingreadershipbyplagiarizinglargepartsofpreviouspublications,presentingfabricateddata,oromittingkeynegativedataaremattersofgrossmisconduct,whichrequireproperactionsbyreviewers,editors,andpublishers.
Misinterpretationofstatisticaldataandomissionofdataonadverseeffectsofdrugsarealsounethicalacts,misleadingnon-expertreadership[10].
Minorformsofmisconductaretextrecyclingduetopoorlanguageskillsor"academiclaziness",whichoftenstemfromtheurgetopublishmore,andcanbepreventedbysharpeninglanguageskillsandproperlyorganizingthe*Correspondence:Mohammad.
Abdollahi@UToronto.
Ca1FacultyofPharmacyandPharmaceuticalSciencesResearchCenter,TehranUniversityofMedicalSciences,Tehran1417614411,IranFulllistofauthorinformationisavailableattheendofthearticle2014Abdollahietal.
;licenseeBioMedCentralLtd.
ThisisanOpenAccessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.
0),whichpermitsunrestricteduse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycredited.
TheCreativeCommonsPublicDomainDedicationwaiver(http://creativecommons.
org/publicdomain/zero/1.
0/)appliestothedatamadeavailableinthisarticle,unlessotherwisestated.
Abdollahietal.
DARUJournalofPharmaceuticalSciences2014,22:53http://www.
darujps.
com/content/22/1/53writingwork.
Whetherornotsucha"minor"misconductrequiresmanuscriptwithdrawalorretractiondependsontheintentionandseveralotherfactors.
Inanycase,relyingonavailableguidancefromCOPEmayhelpreachanethicallyacceptabledecision[11,12].
Current"obsession"withimpactfactorsandindividualimpactindicatorshasledtotheurgetoproducemore"groundbreaking"researchdataandtargethigh-rankingscholarlyjournals.
Authors,whopublishinhigh-impactperiodicals,arelikelytoattractmorecitationsandse-curemorefundingfromgrantholders.
Thewealthiestresearchgrantprovidersprioritizewidely-visibleandmost-impactingpublications,thusforcingresearchersandtheirinstitutionstopublishmoreintopjournalsFigure1TypesofresearchmisconductbytheU.
S.
NationalScienceFoundation,whichmaytakeplaceasaconsequenceoftheurgetopublishmore.
Figure2Consequencesoftheurgetopublishmoreandtheroleofevaluators.
Abdollahietal.
DARUJournalofPharmaceuticalSciences2014,22:53Page2of3http://www.
darujps.
com/content/22/1/53(Figure1).
Asaresult,top-rankingjournalssuchasScience,Nature,Cell,andothersprimarilysufferfromfraudulentandunethicalpublications,eventuallysub-jectedtoretractions[1].
Attheotherextreme,authors,whowishtobuilduptheiracademicprofileandpublishatallcosts,maybetemptedtocircumventthemainstreamjournalswithtoughpeerreviewandtosubmittheirmanuscriptstotheso-calledpredatoryjournalswithnoqualitycontrolorsoft,decorativepeerreview(Figure2).
Themainaimofsuchjournalsistosellaspaceforsubstandardresearchandpoorlyeditedpapersandtoattractinexperiencedau-thors[13].
Predatorypublishersmayalsoclaimthattheypublishjournalsthathavecertainimpactindicators,oftencalculatedbynewlylaunchedbogusimpactagencies.
Researchandacademicinstitutionsshouldtakeanac-tivestanceagainstsuchjournals,andfamiliarizetheirauthorswithwhatconstitutesaqualityandinfluentialjournalandendorsewidelyacceptabletraditionalandalternativeimpactindicators[14].
Onesuchimpactindi-catoristheh-index,whichisuniversallyapplicableforevaluatingpublicationactivityandcitabilityofindividuals,academicdepartments,institutions,andcountries.
Itsbi-dimensionaloriginiswellfittedwiththeconceptofpub-lishingcitablepapersusefulforthescientificcommunity.
Authorsshouldbeawareoffunctionalcharacteristicsofonlinesearchplatforms,bibliographicdatabases,andarchivinghubs.
Open-accesspublishingprovidesoppor-tunitiesforrapiddisseminationofscholarlyinformation.
However,notallonlinejournalsareindexedinevidence-baseddatabasesandarecapableofproperlyarchivingpa-pers.
Biomedicalauthors,whowishtoaddressreadership,interestedinreadingandcitingtheirpapers,shouldtargetMEDLINE-indexedjournalsinthefirstplace.
PublishinginjournalsindexedinMEDLINEandsimultaneouslyar-chivedinPubMedCentralisanaddedvalueasthelatterisanidealplatformforopen-accesspublishingmodelsandpermanentconservationofscholarlyinformation.
PapersarchivedinPubMedCentralcanberetrievedfromPubMedandWebofKnowledgesearchplatforms.
However,journalvisibilityintheseplatformsdiffersfromindexinginMEDLINEandWebofSciencebibliographicdatabases.
Publishersshouldexplicitlyinformpotentialauthorsaboutcorrectindexingandarchivingstatusoftheirjournalsandavoidmanipulatingandchargingfornon-indexedpublications.
Exploringoptionsfordisseminatingscientificideasinanethicalandwell-informedacademicenvironmentisabigissueforbothresearchersandpublishers[15].
Obviously,educatingallstakeholdersofscientificcom-municationsabouteffectiveresearchreporting,openarchivingandre-usingpublishedsources,indexingjour-nals,andcalculatingimpactindicatorsisthelogicalwayoutofunethicalandflawedpublishingenvironment.
Priorityofwell-checkedandeditedpublicationsinjour-nalsindexedinrelevantdatabasesandwebplatformsshouldbecomeaguidingpointforallthosewhorushtopublishmore.
CompetinginterestsMohammadAbdollahi(MA)istheEditor-in-ChiefofDARUandchosethetopictobewrittenbasedonhiseditorialexperiences.
MAisaTrusteeCouncilMemberofCommitteeonPublicationEthics(London,UK)andtheviewsexpressedinthispublicationdonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsoftheCOPE.
ArmenYuriGasparyanistheChiefEditorofEuropeanScienceEditingandaCouncilMemberoftheEuropeanAssociationofScienceEditors(London,UK)andtheviewsexpressedinthispublicationdonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsoftheEASE.
Authors'contributionsAllauthorscontributedequally.
Allauthorsreadandapprovedthefinalmanuscript.
Authordetails1FacultyofPharmacyandPharmaceuticalSciencesResearchCenter,TehranUniversityofMedicalSciences,Tehran1417614411,Iran.
2CouncilMemberoftheEuropeanAssociationofScienceEditors,London,UK.
3DepartmentsofRheumatologyandResearch&Development,DudleyGroupNHSFoundationTrust,TeachingTrustofUniversityofBirmingham,UK,RussellsHallHospital,Dudley,WestMidlandsDY12HQ,UnitedKingdom.
4MedicinalPlantsResearchCenter,TehranUniversityofMedicalSciences,Tehran1417614411,Iran.
Received:15June2014Accepted:18June2014Published:30June2014References1.
GasparyanAY,AyvazyanL,AkazhanovNA,KitasGD:Self-correctioninbiomedicalpublicationsandthescientificimpact.
CroatMedJ2014,55:61–72.
2.
DecullierE,HuotL,SamsonG,MaisonneuveH:Visibilityofretractions:across-sectionalone-yearstudy.
BMCResNotes2013,6:238.
3.
SalariP,NamaziH,AbdollahiM,KhansariF,NikfarS,LarijaniB,AraminiaB:Codeofethicsforthenationalpharmaceuticalsystem:Codifyingandcompilation.
JResMedSci2013,18:442–448.
4.
BayramiZ,AbdollahiM:Observanceofethicalcodesinselectingsupervisorbypostgraduatestudents.
JMedEthicsHistMed2011,4:1.
5.
GasparyanAY,AyvazyanL,AkazhanovNA,KitasGD:Conflictsofinterestinbiomedicalpublications:considerationsforauthors,peerreviewers,andeditors.
CroatMedJ2013,54:600–608.
6.
Cases.
Availableat:http://publicationethics.
org/cases[Lastaccessed:June10,2014]7.
Retractionguidelines.
Availableat:http://www.
publicationethics.
org/files/retraction%20guidelines.
pdf[Lastaccessed:June10,2014]8.
FischerP:NewResearchMisconductPolicies:NSF.
Availableat:http://www.
nsf.
gov/oig/session.
pdf[Lastaccessed:June10,2014]9.
ZietmanAL:Falsification,fabrication,andplagiarism:theunholytrinityofscientificwriting.
IntJRadiatOncolBiolPhys2013,87:225–227.
10.
KoocherGP,Keith-SpiegelP:Peersnipmisconductinthebud.
Nature2010,466:438–440.
11.
Whattodoifyoususpectplagiarism.
Availableat:http://publicationethics.
org/files/u7140/plagiarism%20A.
pdf[Lastaccessed:June10,2014]12.
Whattodoifyoususpectfabricateddata.
Availableat:http://publicationethics.
org/files/u7140/Fabricated%20data%20A.
pdf[Lastaccessed:June10,2014]13.
BeallJ:Predatorypublishersarecorruptingopenaccess.
Nature2012,489:179.
14.
BornmannL,MarxW,GasparyanAY,KitasGD:Diversity,valueandlimitationsofthejournalimpactfactorandalternativemetrics.
RheumatolInt2012,32:1861–1867.
15.
MaqboolF,BahadarH,AbdollahiM:Scienceforthebenefitsofall:Thewayfromideatoproduct.
JMedHypothesesIdeas2014,8:74–77.
doi:10.
1186/2008-2231-22-53Citethisarticleas:Abdollahietal.
:Theurgetopublishmoreanditsconsequences.
DARUJournalofPharmaceuticalSciences201422:53.
Abdollahietal.
DARUJournalofPharmaceuticalSciences2014,22:53Page3of3http://www.
darujps.
com/content/22/1/53