What do general surgeons know about predatory journals? Results of a survey in Argentina

Abstract

Background: The academic pressure to “publish or perish” has driven the proliferation of predatory journals, which exploit the open access model without providing legitimate publishing services. These publications affect credibility, resources and scientific integrity, posing a threat to general surgery and other disciplines.
Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the awareness and attitudes of general surgeons in Argentina concerning predatory publications.
Material and methods: We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study based on an anonymous survey distributed to general surgeons in Argentina. The survey included questions on demographic variables, scientific production and experience with predatory journals. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.
Results: Of 108 participants, 59.26% indicated that they were not familiar with the term “predatory journal” and 75% were unaware of the criteria to identify them. Only 3.7% indicated that they had published in this type of journal and 23.2% stated that they were not sure. Most respondents (58.3%) indicated that it is crucial to be informed about this matter. The study identified that young surgeons may be more vulnerable to these publications.
Conclusion: There is a notable lack of knowledge about predatory journals among general surgeons in Argentina, suggesting the need for educational programs. Integrating training strategies within academic institutions could safeguard scientific integrity and train surgeons with the knowledge to avoid such publications.