LiesegangTJSchachatAPAlbertDM. 2005. The open access initiative in scientific and biomedical publishing: fourth in the series on editorship. Am J Ophthalmol. 139(1):156–167.
7.
MimouniMBraunEMimouniFBMimouniDBlumenthalEZ. 2017. Beall’s list removed: what stands between us and open access predators?Am J Med. 130(8):e371–e372.
8.
RedbergRF. 2018. JAMA Internal Medicine—the year in review, 2017. JAMA Intern Med. 178(4):456–457.
9.
ShamseerLMoherDMaduekweOTurnerLBarbourVBurchRClarkJGalipeauJRobertsJSheaBJ. 2017. Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison. BMC Med. 15(1):28.
10.
WagerE. 2017. Why we should worry less about predatory publishers and more about the quality of research and training at our academic institutions. J Epidemiol. 27(3):87–88.
11.
WeineckSBKoelblingerDKiesslichT. 2015. Medical habilitation in German-speaking countries: Quantitative assessment of content and elaboration of habilitation guidelines [in German]. Chirurg. 86(4):355–365.
12.
XiaJHarmonJLConnollyKGDonnellyRMAndersonMRHowardHA. 2015. Who publishes in “predatory” journals?J Assn Inf Sci Tec. 66(7):1406–1417.
