Frontiers Media

Last updated

Frontiers Media
Frontiers Media logo.svg
Founded2007;17 years ago (2007)
FounderKamila Markram and Henry Markram
Country of originSwitzerland
Headquarters location Lausanne
Publication types Open access scientific journals
Nonfiction topics Medicine, life sciences, technology
No. of employees>1,400 (2022) [1]
Official website www.frontiersin.org

Frontiers Media SA is a publisher of peer-reviewed, open access, scientific journals [2] currently active in science, technology, and medicine. It was founded in 2007 by Kamila and Henry Markram. [1] Frontiers is based in Lausanne, Switzerland, with offices in the United Kingdom, Spain, and China. [3] In 2022, Frontiers employed more than 1,400 people, across 14 countries. [1] All Frontiers journals are published under a Creative Commons Attribution License. [4]

Contents

In 2015, Frontiers Media was classified as a possible predatory publisher by Jeffrey Beall, [5] though Beall's list was taken offline two years later [6] in a decision that remains controversial.

History

The first journal published was Frontiers in Neuroscience, which opened for submission as a beta version in 2007.[ citation needed ] In 2010, Frontiers launched a series of another 11 journals in medicine and science. In February 2012, the Frontiers Research Network was launched, [7] a social networking platform for researchers, intended to disseminate the open access articles published in the Frontiers journals, and to provide related conferences, blogs, news, video lectures and job postings. [8]

In February 2013, the Nature Publishing Group (NPG) (now Nature Research) acquired a controlling interest in Frontiers Media, [9] however collaboration between the Nature Publishing Group and Frontiers ended in 2015. [10]

Frontiers for Young Minds was launched in November 2013 during the Annual Meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in collaboration with NPG as a web-based science journal that involves young people in the review of scientific articles with the help of scientists who act as mentors. [11] [12]

In early September 2014, Frontiers received the ALPSP Gold Award for Innovation in Publishing from the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. [13]

In October 2015, Frontiers (in collaboration with NPG) launched Loop, a research network that is open to be integrated into any publisher's or academic organization's website, [14] [15] and Loop soon included a collaboration with ORCID to link and synchronize researcher profile information. [16] The Technical University of Madrid was the first university to link their Loop profile to their institutional website. [17]

In 2019, Frontiers joined the Initiative for Open Citations. [18]

In May 2020, Frontiers Media launched its Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant software to external editors. [19] The software helps identify conflicts of interest and plagiarism, assesses manuscript and peer review quality, and recommends editors and reviewers, [19] [20] although the software does not flag all forms of conflict of interest, such as undisclosed funding sources or affiliations. [19]

In 2022, a group of publishers including Frontiers Media joined the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers' STM Integrity Hub, an initiative to provide publishers with tools to combat journal article submissions with integrity issues from research paper mills. [21]

List of journals

The Frontiers journals use open peer review, where the names of reviewers of accepted articles are made public. [22]

In February 2016, the company published 54 journals, [23] a number that grew to over 230 journals by 2024. [24] The collection of all the journals in the series is sometimes considered a megajournal, as is the BioMed Central series. [23] [25] [26] Some journals, such as Frontiers in Human Neuroscience [27] or Frontiers in Microbiology [28] are considered megajournals on their own. Some journals published by Frontiers are:

as well as

Indexing and abstracting

The National Publication Committee of Norway has assigned Frontiers Media an institutional-level rating of "level 0" in the Norwegian Scientific Index since 2018, indicating that the publisher is "not academic", [29] however individual Frontiers journals have separate journal-level ratings. As of 2022, 96 Frontiers journals are listed in the Norwegian Scientific Index, of which 2 have a rating of "level 2" (top 20% of all journals in their field), over 88 have a rating of "level 1" (standard academic), 1 has a rating of level X (possibly predatory), and 5 have a rating of "level 0" (not academic). [29]

As of 2022, Frontiers publishes over 185 academic journals, including 48 journals indexed within the Science Citation Index Expanded, and 4 journals indexed within the Social Sciences Citation Index, [30] with a total of 51 journals ranked with an impact factor. [31] Furthermore, as of 2021, 9 Frontiers Media journals have been selected for inclusion in MEDLINE. [32]

In broader databases, Frontiers has over 200 journals indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), [33] over 60 journals listed in PubMed Central (PMC), [34] and over 110 journals listed in Scopus. [35]

Frontiers journals are included in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ); the publisher has been on DOAJ's advisory board & council since 2019. [36] Frontiers is also a member of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA); a participating publisher and supporter of the Initiative for Open Citations; a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); and a member of the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers (STM). As of 2023, Frontiers publishes over 220 academic journals, and following the 2023 release of the Web of Science Group's Journal Citation Reports (JCR 2022) and Scopus' CiteScore, 72 of the journals published by Frontiers have a Journal Impact Factor and 79 journals have a CiteScore. [37]

Controversies

Editorial concerns

In May 2015, Frontiers Media removed the entire editorial boards of Frontiers in Medicine and Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine after editors complained that Frontiers Media staff were "interfering with editorial decisions and violating core principles of medical publishing". In total 31 editors were removed. Following this incident, Nature Publishing Group ended its collaboration with Frontiers with the intent "never to mention again that Nature Publishing Group has some kind of involvement in Frontiers." [10]

In June 2015, Retraction Watch referred to the publisher as one with "a history of badly handled and controversial retractions and publishing decisions". [38]

According to researchers referenced in a 2015 blog post quoted by Allison and James Kaufman in the 2018 book Pseudoscience: The Conspiracy Against Science , "Frontiers has used an in-house journals management software that does not give reviewers the option to recommend the rejection of manuscripts" and the "system is setup to make it almost impossible to reject papers". [39] However, as of 2022, Frontiers maintains that reviewers are given the option to reject papers with specific recommendations. [40]

In 2017, further editors were removed, allegedly for their rejection rate being high.[ citation needed ] In December 2017, Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky of Retraction Watch wrote in the magazine Nautilus that the acceptance rate of manuscripts in Frontiers journals was reported to be near 90%. [41]

In 2022, the editors of a special issue with the online journal Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics voiced their concerns about the editorial practices at Frontiers, including flaws in the peer review process, unwillingness to discuss these concerns, and forbidding the editors from writing about their concerns in the editorial of the special issue. [42]

In January 2023, Zhejiang Gongshang University (浙江工商大学) in Hangzhou, China, announced it would no longer include articles published in Hindawi, MDPI, and Frontiers journals when evaluating researcher performance. [43] [44]

Also in January 2023, INRIA released recommendations on "grey-zone publishers", namely Frontiers and MDPI, highlighting stark differences in editorial process between titles owned by Frontiers and other journals in the fields of Computer Science and Mathematics, and urging "extreme vigilance about the quality of articles published by Frontiers." [45]

In 2024, a study highlighted how MDPI, Frontiers, and Hindawi journals had massively increased their publishing of special issue articles, associated with very rapid article acceptances. This has raised concerns over the quality of the Frontiers peer review process. [46]

Inclusion in Beall's list

In October 2015, Frontiers was added to Beall's List of "Potential, possible, or probable" predatory open-access publishers. [47] [48] The inclusion was met with backlash among some researchers. [47] Daniël Lakens, researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, said "articles people have published in Frontiers are no longer judged based on their own quality, but are now seen as less valuable because Frontiers is on Beall's list" and that "[h]aving a single influential individual cast doubt on such a huge journal feels very unfair". [49] At the time, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) said that "there have been vigorous discussions about, and some editors are uncomfortable with, the editorial processes at Frontiers" but that "the processes are declared clearly on the publisher's site and we do not believe there is any attempt to deceive either editors or authors about these processes". [50] Frontiers was a member of COPE; the statement concluded that "we have no concerns about Frontiers being a COPE member and are happy to work with them". [50] For transparency, COPE added that one of Frontiers' employees, Mirjam Curno, sits on COPE's council, although that employee was not involved in the statement. [50]

In July 2016 the maintainer of Beall's List, Jeff Beall, recommended that academics not publish their work in Frontiers journals, stating "the fringe science published in Frontiers journals stigmatizes the honest research submitted and published there", [51] and in October of that year Beall reported that reviewers have called the review process "merely for show". [52]

In September 2016, Frontiers demanded that the university where Beall worked force him to retract his claims. [53] [54] Beall deleted his blacklist in January 2017. [55] Pressure by Frontiers was reported to be a large factor in the controversial shutdown of Beall's List. [54]

Controversial articles

This widely-mocked figure was captioned as "Spermatogonial stem cells, isolated, purified and cultured from rat testes". AI generated figure published in a Frontiers journal.png
This widely-mocked figure was captioned as "Spermatogonial stem cells, isolated, purified and cultured from rat testes".

In April 2013, Frontiers in Psychology retracted a controversial article linking climate change denialism and "conspiracist ideation"; [56] [ irrelevant citation ] the retraction was itself also controversial and led to the resignations of at least three editors. [57]

In late September 2014, Frontiers in Public Health published a controversial article that supported HIV denialism; three days later the publisher issued a statement of concern and announced an investigation into the review process of the article. [58] It was eventually decided that the article would not be retracted but instead was reclassified as an opinion piece. [59] It has since been retracted. [60]

In November 2016, a paper in Frontiers in Public Health linking vaccines to autism was provisionally-accepted, then retracted. Public criticism noted the paper relied on flawed methodology for reliable results, basing its conclusions only on an online questionnaire, filled in by 415 mothers of school children who self-reported whether their children had neurodevelopmental disorders, and their vaccination status. [61]

In 2021, a provisionally accepted controversial paper in Frontiers in Pharmacology on COVID-19 and the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin was ultimately rejected by the editors as it contained "unsubstantiated claims and violated the journal's editorial policies". This drew anger from the authors of the paper, who called the move "censorship". [62] Retraction Watch noted that this was not the first time Frontiers provisionally accepted and then rejected a controversial paper. [63]

A study published in Frontiers in Virology in February 2022 said that Moderna had patented a 19 nucleotide genetic sequence uniquely matching a part of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein three years prior to the pandemic, arguing it was evidence that the virus was manufactured as part of a lab leak conspiracy. [64] [65] The study has been widely derided for its misunderstanding of statistical likelihood, particularly as the 19 nucleotide sequence is not unique to SARS-CoV-2, and is also found in organisms like bacteria and birds. [65] [66] Craig Wilen, an immunobiology professor of the Yale School of Medicine, likened the study to "complete garbage" and a "conspiracy theory" rather than legitimate research. [64] [67]

A now-retracted 2024 paper published in Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology [68] was criticized for having figures AI generated with Midjourney, described as featuring "garbled text and a wildly incorrect diagram of a rat penis". [69] [70] Microbiologist and scientific integrity consultant Elisabeth Bik described it as being "a sad example of how scientific journals, editors, and peer reviewers can be naive—or possibly even in the loop—in terms of accepting and publishing AI-generated crap". [69]

Related Research Articles

In academic publishing, a retraction is a mechanism by which a published paper in an academic journal is flagged for being seriously flawed to the extent that their results and conclusions can no longer be relied upon. Retracted articles are not removed from the published literature but marked as retracted. In some cases it may be necessary to remove an article from publication, such as when the article is clearly defamatory, violates personal privacy, is the subject of a court order, or might pose a serious health risk to the general public.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hindawi (publisher)</span> Scientific and medical journal publisher

Hindawi was a publisher of peer-reviewed, open access, scientific journals active in scientific, technical, and medical (STM) literature. It was founded in 1997 in Cairo, Egypt, and purchased in 2021 for $298 million by John Wiley & Sons, a large US-based publishing company.

<i>PLOS One</i> Peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal

PLOS One is a peer-reviewed open access mega journal published by the Public Library of Science (PLOS) since 2006. The journal covers primary research from any discipline within science and medicine. The Public Library of Science began in 2000 with an online petition initiative by Nobel Prize winner Harold Varmus, formerly director of the National Institutes of Health and at that time director of Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center; Patrick O. Brown, a biochemist at Stanford University; and Michael Eisen, a computational biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

MDPI is a publisher of open-access scientific journals. It publishes over 390 peer-reviewed, open access journals. MDPI is among the largest publishers in the world in terms of journal article output, and is the largest publisher of open access articles.

Entropy is a monthly open access scientific journal covering research on all aspects of entropy and information theory. It was established in 1999 and is published by MDPI. The journal occasionally publishes special issues compiled by guest editors. The editor-in-chief is Kevin H. Knuth.

Pulsus Group is a health informatics and digital marketing company and publisher of scientific, technical, and medical literature. It was formed in 1984, primarily to publish peer-reviewed medical journals. As of 2016, Pulsus published 98 hybrid and full open-access journals, 15 of which had been adopted as the official publications of related medical societies. Pulsus Group also conducts conferences in association with scientific societies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bentham Science Publishers</span> Academic publishing company

Bentham Science Publishers is a company that publishes scientific, technical, and medical journals and e-books. It publishes over 120 subscription-based academic journals and around 40 open access journals.

Scientific Research Publishing (SCIRP) is a predatory academic publisher of open-access electronic journals, conference proceedings, and scientific anthologies that are considered to be of questionable quality. As of December 2014, it offered 244 English-language open-access journals in the areas of science, technology, business, economy, and medicine.

Frontiers in Psychology is a peer-reviewed open-access academic journal covering all aspects of psychology. It was established in 2010 and is published by Frontiers Media, a controversial company that is included in Jeffrey Beall's list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory publishers". The editor-in-chief is Axel Cleeremans.

Scientific Reports is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific mega journal published by Nature Portfolio, covering all areas of the natural sciences. The journal was established in 2011. The journal states that their aim is to assess solely the scientific validity of a submitted paper, rather than its perceived importance, significance, or impact.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Retraction Watch</span> Blog covering scientific paper retractions

Retraction Watch is a blog that reports on retractions of scientific papers and on related topics. The blog was launched in August 2010 and is produced by science writers Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus. Its parent organization is the Center for Scientific Integrity, a US 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">OMICS Publishing Group</span> Discredited academic publishing company

OMICS Publishing Group is a predatory publisher of open access academic journals. It started publishing its first journal in 2008. By 2015, it claimed over 700 journals, although about half of them were defunct. Its subsidiaries and brands include Allied Academies, Conference Series LLC LTD, EuroSciCon LTD, Hilaris Publishing, iMedPub LTD, International Online Medical Council (IOMC), Longdom Publishing SL, Meetings International, Prime Scholars, Pulsus Group, Research & Reviews, SciTechnol, Trade Science Inc, Life Science Events, Walsh Medical Media, and IT Medical Team.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Predatory publishing</span> Fraudulent business model for scientific publications

Predatory publishing, also write-only publishing or deceptive publishing, is an exploitative academic publishing business model, where the journal or publisher prioritizes self-interest at the expense of scholarship. It is characterized by misleading information, deviates from the standard peer-review process, is highly non-transparent, and often utilizes aggressive solicitation practices.

Beall's List was a prominent list of predatory open-access publishers that was maintained by University of Colorado librarian Jeffrey Beall on his blog Scholarly Open Access. The list aimed to document open-access publishers who did not perform real peer review, effectively publishing any article as long as the authors pay the article processing charge. Originally started as a personal endeavor in 2008, Beall's List became a widely followed piece of work by the mid-2010s. The list was used by scientists to identify exploitative publishers and detect publisher spam.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Who's Afraid of Peer Review?</span> 2013 article by John Bohannon

"Who's Afraid of Peer Review?" is an article written by Science correspondent John Bohannon that describes his investigation of peer review among fee-charging open-access journals. Between January and August 2013, Bohannon submitted fake scientific papers to 304 journals owned by fee-charging open access publishers. The papers, writes Bohannon, "were designed with such grave and obvious scientific flaws that they should have been rejected immediately by editors and peer reviewers", but 60% of the journals accepted them. The article and associated data were published in the 4 October 2013 issue of Science as open access.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeffrey Beall</span> American librarian

Jeffrey Beall is an American librarian and library scientist who drew attention to "predatory open access publishing", a term he coined, and created Beall's list, a list of potentially predatory open-access publishers. He is a critic of the open access publishing movement and particularly how predatory publishers use the open access concept, and is known for his blog Scholarly Open Access. He has also written on this topic in The Charleston Advisor, in Nature, in Learned Publishing, and elsewhere.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephanie Seneff</span> American anti-vaccination activist

Stephanie Seneff is an American computer scientist and anti-vaccine activist. She is a senior research scientist at the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Working primarily in the Spoken Language Systems group, her research at CSAIL relates to human–computer interaction, and algorithms for language understanding and speech recognition. In 2011, she began publishing controversial papers in low-impact, open access journals on biology and medical topics; the articles have received "heated objections from experts in almost every field she's delved into," according to the food columnist Ari LeVaux.

Cureus:Journal of Medical Science is a web-based open access general medical journal that uses an accelerated pre-publication peer-review and an optional post-publication peer review. It is also the first academic journal which provides authors with step-by-step templates for them to use to write their papers. The journal's founding editors-in-chief are John R. Adler and Alexander Muacevic.

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine is a peer-reviewed open access scientific journal covering all aspects of cardiology and vascular medicine with an emphasis on studies that offer new treatments and practices or facilitate the translation of scientific advances into clinical practice. It was established in 2014 and is published by Frontiers Media. The editors-in-chief are Hendrik Tevaearai Stahel and Masanori Aikawa.

Kowsar - now Brieflands - is an STM publishing company which was founded in 2002 by S.M. Miri and Seyed-Moayed Alavian. Kowsar journals have been peer reviewed and are published open access under a Creative Commons Attribution License Non Commercial 4.0. The company is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

References

  1. 1 2 3 "The Next frontier". Forbes (in German). 4 April 2022. Archived from the original on 23 May 2022. Retrieved 24 May 2022.
  2. ↑ "Members: OA Professional Publishing Organizations". Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). Archived from the original on 21 September 2013. Retrieved 4 February 2013.
  3. ↑ "About Frontiers | Academic Journals and Research Community". Archived from the original on 15 September 2019. Retrieved 6 September 2019.
  4. ↑ "Frontiers Copyright Statement". 2018. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
  5. ↑ Bloudoff-Indelicato, Mollie (2015). "Backlash after Frontiers journals added to list of questionable publishers". Nature. 526 (7575): 613. Bibcode:2015Natur.526..613B. doi: 10.1038/526613f . ISSN   1476-4687. S2CID   4391970.
  6. ↑ "No More 'Beall's List'". Archived from the original on 14 June 2017. Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  7. ↑ "Frontiers launches Social Networking for Scientists". Frontiers Media. 9 February 2012. Archived from the original on 14 June 2012. Retrieved 3 May 2012.
  8. ↑ "Events". Frontiers Media. Archived from the original on 10 May 2012. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  9. ↑ P., J. (27 February 2013). "Changing Nature". The Economist. Archived from the original on 11 July 2017. Retrieved 17 December 2014.
  10. 1 2 Enserink, Martin (20 May 2015). "Open-access publisher sacks 31 editors amid fierce row over independence". Science. doi:10.1126/science.aac4629.
  11. ↑ "Frontiers for Young Minds Launches at USA Science and Engineering Festival". Frontiers. Archived from the original on 28 June 2015. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  12. ↑ "Young Minds on Scientific American". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 22 October 2015. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  13. ↑ Page, Benedicte (11 September 2014). "Frontiers is major winner at ALPSP innovation awards | The Bookseller". The Book Seller. Archived from the original on 23 March 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
  14. ↑ "Frontiers Loop". Frontiers. Archived from the original on 28 May 2015. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  15. ↑ "Frontiers launches Loop social network". The Bookseller. Archived from the original on 20 May 2015. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  16. ↑ "ORCID and Loop new researcher profile system". Orcid. 7 October 2015. Archived from the original on 10 November 2015. Retrieved 26 October 2015.
  17. ↑ "UPM leads way as first university to integrate Loop". loop. 7 July 2015. Archived from the original on 7 September 2015. Retrieved 26 October 2015.
  18. ↑ "Initiative for Open Citations". Archived from the original on 7 April 2017. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
  19. 1 2 3 "Do You Have a Conflict of Interest? This Robotic Assistant May Find It First". The New York Times . 23 November 2020. Archived from the original on 7 January 2021. Retrieved 4 January 2021.
  20. ↑ "Peer Review of Scholarly Research Gets an AI Boost". IEEE Spectrum . 27 July 2020. Archived from the original on 8 January 2021. Retrieved 4 January 2021.
  21. ↑ Else, Holly (2 December 2022). "Paper-mill detector put to the test in push to stamp out fake science". Nature . Archived from the original on 20 December 2022. Retrieved 8 December 2022.
  22. ↑ Helmer, Markus; Schottdorf, Manuel; Neef, Andreas; Battaglia, Demian (21 March 2017). "Gender bias in scholarly peer review". eLife. 6. doi: 10.7554/elife.21718 . PMC   5360442 . PMID   28322725.
  23. 1 2 Spezi, Valerie; Wakeling, Simon; Pinfield, Stephen; Creaser, Claire; Fry, Jenny; Willett, Peter (2017). "Open-access mega-journals: The future of scholarly communication or academic dumping ground? A review" (PDF). Journal of Documentation. 73 (2): 263–283. doi:10.1108/JD-06-2016-0082. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 November 2018. Retrieved 20 February 2019. Series, such as the BMC Series ... or Frontiers in [...] Series ... might, taken as a whole, be viewed as a broad disciplinary scope journal. This is particularly the case when series titles seem to be marketed and managed as a coherent set rather than as separate titles.
  24. ↑ "Journals A-Z". Frontiers Media. Archived from the original on 25 May 2020. Retrieved 2 June 2020.
  25. ↑ Domnina, T. N. (2016). "A megajournal as a new type of scientific publication". Scientific and Technical Information Processing. 43 (4): 241–250. doi:10.3103/S0147688216040079. S2CID   17769019.
  26. ↑ Binfield, Peter (17 December 2013). "Novel Scholarly Journal Concepts". In Bartling, S.; Friesike, S. (eds.). Opening Science. Springer Science+Business Media. pp. 155–163. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_10. ISBN   978-3-319-00025-1.
  27. ↑ Ware, Mark; Mabe, Michael (2015). "The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing" (PDF). International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers . Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 June 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
  28. ↑ Schloss, Patrick D.; Johnston, Mark; Casadevall, Arturo (26 September 2017). "Support science by publishing in scientific society journals". mBio. 8 (5): e01633-17. doi:10.1128/mBio.01633-17. PMC   5615203 . PMID   28951482.
  29. 1 2 "Frontiers". Norwegian Scientific Index . Archived from the original on 5 April 2023. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
  30. ↑ "Web of Science Master Journal List". Web of Science Group. Archived from the original on 20 June 2020. Retrieved 23 November 2022.
  31. ↑ "Frontiers | Frontiers' Impact". www.frontiersin.org. Archived from the original on 23 November 2022. Retrieved 23 November 2022.
  32. ↑ "currentlyindexed[All Fields] AND currentlyindexedelectronic[All Fields - NLM Catalog - NCBI". www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Archived from the original on 17 February 2024. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
  33. ↑ "Journals". Directory of Open Access Journals. Archived from the original on 17 February 2024. Retrieved 25 May 2021.
  34. ↑ "PMC Journals". PubMed Central . Archived from the original on 10 April 2022. Retrieved 27 May 2021.
  35. ↑ "Scopus Sources". Scopus . Archived from the original on 15 May 2021. Retrieved 27 May 2021.
  36. ↑ "Directory of Open Access Journals – DOAJ". Archived from the original on 12 December 2023. Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  37. ↑ "Impact — Frontiers Progress Report 2022". Archived from the original on 12 December 2023. Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  38. ↑ Megan Scudellari (2 June 2015). ""[T]hese things can happen in every lab:" Mutant plant paper uprooted after authors correct their own findings". Retraction Watch . Archived from the original on 8 December 2015. Retrieved 5 December 2015.
  39. ↑ Kaufman, Allison B.; Kaufman, James C. (2018). Pseudoscience: The Conspiracy Against Science. MIT Press. p. 292. ISBN   9780262037426. Archived from the original on 17 February 2024. Retrieved 17 October 2020. Frontiers has used an in-house journal management software that does not give reviewers the option to recommend the rejection of manuscripts they have reviewed. The publisher's systems are set up to make it almost impossible to reject papers, perhaps to keep potential revenue from jumping to a rival publisher. Increasingly, journal management software is designed to optimize a publisher's revenue.
  40. ↑ ""Review Editor Guidelines"" (PDF). Frontiers Media SA . 4 April 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 April 2023. Retrieved 14 April 2023.
  41. ↑ Marcus, Adam; Oransky, Ivan (7 December 2017). "Why Garbage Science Gets Published". Nautilus. Archived from the original on 16 March 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
  42. ↑ "Reflections on guest editing a Frontiers journal". www.leidenmadtrics.nl. 31 October 2022. Archived from the original on 14 November 2022. Retrieved 14 November 2022.
  43. ↑ ForeignFriends. "MDPI, Frontiers & Hindawi are blacklisted by a university". Weixin Official Accounts Platform. Archived from the original on 27 January 2023. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  44. ↑ "突发：一高校将Frontiers、MDPI、Hindawi三大OA出版社旗下所有期刊纳入黑名单！_社会科学_教育部_学科". www.sohu.com. Archived from the original on 17 February 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2023.
  45. ↑ Blanqui, Frédéric; Canteaut, Anne; Jong, Hidde De; Imperiale, Sébastien; Mitton, Nathalie; Pallez, Guillaume; Pennec, Xavier; Rival, Xavier; Thirion, Bertrand (25 January 2023). "Recommendations on "Grey-Zone Publishers"". INRIA: 1–3.
  46. ↑ Hanson, Mark A.; Barreiro, Pablo Gómez; Crosetto, Paolo; Brockington, Dan (8 November 2024). "The strain on scientific publishing". Quantitative Science Studies: 1–21. doi:10.1162/qss_a_00327. ISSN   2641-3337.
  47. 1 2 Bloudoff-Indelicato M (2015). "Backlash after Frontiers journals added to list of questionable publishers". Nature. 525 (7575): 613. Bibcode:2015Natur.526..613B. doi: 10.1038/526613f .
  48. ↑ Beall, Jeffrey. "LIST OF PUBLISHERS". Scholarly Open Access. Archived from the original on 12 January 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  49. ↑ Bloudoff-Indelicato, Mollie (October 2015). "Backlash after Frontiers journals added to list of questionable publishers". Nature. 526 (7575): 613. Bibcode:2015Natur.526..613B. doi: 10.1038/526613f . ISSN   1476-4687. S2CID   4391970.
  50. 1 2 3 "COPE statement on Frontiers". COPE. October 2015. Archived from the original on 23 November 2015. Retrieved 12 November 2015. COPE October 2015 News Index Archived 12 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine
  51. ↑ Beall, Jeffrey (14 July 2016). "More Fringe Science from Borderline Publisher Frontiers". Scholarly Open Access. Archived from the original on 9 August 2016.
  52. ↑ Beall, Jeffrey. "Reviewer to Frontiers: Your Review Process is Merely for Show — I quit". Scholarly Open Access. Archived from the original on 27 November 2016. Retrieved 26 November 2016.
  53. ↑ Schneider, Leonid (14 September 2016). "Beall-listed Frontiers empire strikes back". For Better Science. Archived from the original on 27 November 2016. Retrieved 26 November 2016. Frontiers disagrees with this librarian's privately held views, the publisher demands of his academic employer to impose disciplinary measures or coercion against Beall.
  54. 1 2 Basken, Paul (12 September 2017). "Why Beall's List Died — and What It Left Unresolved About Open Access". The Chronicle of Higher Education . Archived from the original on 15 March 2018. Retrieved 14 March 2017.
  55. ↑ Swauger, Shea (1 December 2017). "Open access, power, and privilege: A response to "What I learned from predatory publishing"". College & Research Libraries News . 78 (11): 603–606. doi: 10.5860/crln.78.11.603 .
  56. ↑ Herndon, J. Marvin (30 June 2016). "Human and Environmental Dangers Posed by Ongoing Global Tropospheric Aerosolized Particulates for Weather Modification". Frontiers in Public Health. 4 (139): 139. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00139 . PMC   4927569 . PMID   27433467. (Retracted, see doi:10.3389/fpubh.2016.00156, PMID   27453892,  Retraction Watch)
  57. ↑ "Chief specialty editor resigns from Frontiers in wake of controversial retraction". Retraction Watch . 9 April 2014. Archived from the original on 6 October 2014. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  58. ↑ "Publisher issues statement of concern about HIV denial paper, launches investigation". Retraction Watch . 26 September 2014. Archived from the original on 29 September 2014. Retrieved 21 October 2015.
  59. ↑ Ferguson, Cat (24 February 2015). "Frontiers lets HIV denial article stand, reclassifies it as "opinion"". Retraction Watch. Archived from the original on 16 March 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
  60. ↑ Goodson, P. (2014). "Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent". Frontiers in Public Health. 2: 154. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00154 . PMC   4172096 . PMID   25695040. (Retracted, see doi:10.3389/fpubh.2019.00334, PMID   31720286,  Retraction Watch)
  61. ↑ Chawla, Dalmeet Singh (28 November 2016). "Study linking vaccines to autism pulled following heavy criticism". Retraction Watch . Archived from the original on 16 March 2018. Retrieved 14 March 2018.
  62. ↑ Offord, Catherine (28 March 2021). "Frontiers Removes Controversial Ivermectin Paper Pre-Publication". TheScientist . Archived from the original on 10 January 2022. Retrieved 2 March 2018.
  63. ↑ "Weekend reads: An apology from JAMA; a call to retract COVID-19 ayurveda paper; the treasure that was a hoax". Retraction Watch . 28 November 2016. Archived from the original on 6 March 2021. Retrieved 6 March 2021.
  64. 1 2 Zhang, Legu; Echols, William (1 April 2022). "Made by Moderna? China Spreads Yet Another Debunked COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory". Polygraph.info . Voice of America. Archived from the original on 16 September 2024. Retrieved 16 September 2024.
  65. 1 2 Cercone, Jeff (14 March 2022). "No, study doesn't prove Moderna 'created' COVID-19". PolitiFact . Archived from the original on 10 August 2022. Retrieved 10 August 2022.
  66. ↑ Teoh, Flora (2 March 2022). "Short identical gene sequence in SARS-CoV-2 and a gene sequence patented by Moderna can be found in other organisms; not evidence that virus was engineered". Science Feedback. Health Feedback. Archived from the original on 16 September 2024. Retrieved 16 September 2024.
  67. ↑ Savage, Claire (24 March 2022). "Scientific paper does not prove Moderna 'created' coronavirus". Agence France-Presse . Archived from the original on 10 August 2022. Retrieved 10 August 2022.
  68. ↑ Guo, Xinyu; Dong, Liang; Hao, Dingjun (2024). "Cellular functions of spermatogonial stem cells in relation to JAK/STAT signaling pathway". Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 11. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2023.1339390 . (Retracted, see doi:10.3389/fcell.2024.1386861,  Retraction Watch)
  69. 1 2 Pearson, Jordan (15 February 2024). "Scientific Journal Publishes AI-Generated Rat with Gigantic Penis In Worrying Incident". Vice Media. Archived from the original on 15 February 2024. Retrieved 15 February 2024.
  70. ↑ Mole, Beth (15 February 2024). "Scientists aghast at bizarre AI rat with huge genitals in peer-reviewed article". Ars Technica . Archived from the original on 16 February 2024. Retrieved 17 February 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.