Skip to main content

Table 7 Editorial process and peer review

From: Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison

  

Predatory, N = 93, n (%)

Open Access, N = 99, n (%)

Subscription-based, N = 100, n (%)

Stated manuscript handling process

Yes

53 (56.99)

90 (90.91)

86 (86.00)

Submission system

Third party

2 (2.15)

26 (26.26)

75 (75.00)

Journal-specific system

47 (50.54)

70 (70.71)

21 (21.00)

Emailed to journal

65 (69.89)

2 (2.02)

3 (3.00)

Othera

2 (2.15)

5 (5.05)

0 (0)

Not found

0 (0)

0 (0)

3 (3.00)

States using peer review

Yes

89 (95.70)

99 (100)

92 (92.00)

Indicated processing time

‘Rapid’ publication

38 (40.86)

16 (16.16)

9 (9.00)

<1 week peer review turnaround

17 (18.28)

3 (3.03)

1 (1.00)

Expedited peer review

9 (9.68)

4 (4.04)

7 (7.00)

Not indicated

47 (50.54)

84 (84.85)

85 (85.00)

  1. aOther: mailed to journal, publisher-specific system