BMJ 2015;350:h708 doi: 10.1136/bmj.h708 (Published 11 February 2015)
Page 1 of 1
Letters
LETTERS PREDATORY JOURNALS
Reputable publishers and transparency about profits Imti Choonara emeritus professor in child health Academic Division of Child Health (University of Nottingham), Medical School, Derbyshire Children’s Hospital, Derby DE22 3DT, UK
Although I welcome the editorial on predatory journals,1 I was concerned about the lack of information on “reputable publishers.” Predatory journals are accused of having financial gain as their motive and lacking transparency. The same could be said of reputable publishers, who have been accused of making colossal profits—Reed Elsevier’s profits are in the billions.2 3 Most publishers charge fees for open access publishing that ensure they still make huge profits, rather than just cover costs. I suggest that reputable publishers should agree to publish their annual profits in their journals or on their websites. Also, a standard universal open access fee should be introduced. This should be set by non-profit making institutions such as PLoS.
Competing interests: I am a deputy editor for Archives of Disease in Childhood, BMJ Publishing group, and receive payment for this work. I am also an academic editor for PLoS One, for which I am not paid. 1 2 3
Clark J, Smith R. Firm action needed on predatory journals. BMJ 2015;350:h210. (17 January.) Smith R. The highly profitable but unethical business of publishing medical research. J R Soc Med 2006;99:452-6. Dorsey ER, George BP, Dayoub EJ, Ravina BM. Finances of the publishers of the most highly cited US medical journals. J Med Libr Assoc 2011;99:255-8.
Cite this as: BMJ 2015;350:h708 © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2015
[email protected] For personal use only: See rights and reprints http://www.bmj.com/permissions
Subscribe: http://www.bmj.com/subscribe
Page 1 of 1
Letters
LETTERS PREDATORY JOURNALS
Reputable publishers and transparency about profits Imti Choonara emeritus professor in child health Academic Division of Child Health (University of Nottingham), Medical School, Derbyshire Children’s Hospital, Derby DE22 3DT, UK
Although I welcome the editorial on predatory journals,1 I was concerned about the lack of information on “reputable publishers.” Predatory journals are accused of having financial gain as their motive and lacking transparency. The same could be said of reputable publishers, who have been accused of making colossal profits—Reed Elsevier’s profits are in the billions.2 3 Most publishers charge fees for open access publishing that ensure they still make huge profits, rather than just cover costs. I suggest that reputable publishers should agree to publish their annual profits in their journals or on their websites. Also, a standard universal open access fee should be introduced. This should be set by non-profit making institutions such as PLoS.
Competing interests: I am a deputy editor for Archives of Disease in Childhood, BMJ Publishing group, and receive payment for this work. I am also an academic editor for PLoS One, for which I am not paid. 1 2 3
Clark J, Smith R. Firm action needed on predatory journals. BMJ 2015;350:h210. (17 January.) Smith R. The highly profitable but unethical business of publishing medical research. J R Soc Med 2006;99:452-6. Dorsey ER, George BP, Dayoub EJ, Ravina BM. Finances of the publishers of the most highly cited US medical journals. J Med Libr Assoc 2011;99:255-8.
Cite this as: BMJ 2015;350:h708 © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2015
[email protected] For personal use only: See rights and reprints http://www.bmj.com/permissions
Subscribe: http://www.bmj.com/subscribe
