Scholarly publishing literacy and perceptions of predatory publishing among educational partners at a chiropractic...

Chiropractors must find, appraise, and apply high quality, peer-reviewed information sources to make evidence-based clinical practice decisions. This case report describes perceptions of scholarly publishing practices, with a focus on predatory and deceptive publishing, among chiropractic educational partners at one chiropractic college.

An anonymous, online, cross-sectional survey was administered to a convenience sample of 2,476 faculty, staff, and students. The 35-item questionnaire elicited publishing experience, critical appraisal skills, knowledge of scholarly and predatory publishing, and perceptions of chiropractic journals and information resources. Respondents (n=204, 111 students, 36 faculty, 16 administrators, and 41 staff) provided usable survey responses, though skipped items were common. Twenty-six percent had published one or more peer-reviewed publications. Most self-rated themselves as novice or intermediate in their ability to perform literature searches (87%) or critically appraise research articles (82%). Forty-six percent to 69% had not read or were unsure of the quality of scientific evidence for 11 chiropractic-related journals. Fifty-seven percent were unsure or unfamiliar with predatory journals and 51% lacked confidence in recognizing these journals. Predatory practices identified included insufficient or fast peer review, editorial board and impact factor issues, publication fees, plagiarized articles, and unsolicited request for paper submissions. Sixty-one percent requested training or resources on identifying quality academic journals for publication or research.

Chiropractic educational partners were unfamiliar with most chiropractic journals and had little familiarity with predatory publishing. Targeted training on identifying quality academic publications, conducting literature reviews and critically appraising research articles is recommended.