Predatory publishing in dentistry. An analysis of its impact and potential risks

ObjectivesTo make a quantitative assessment of the impact of predatory publishing has on a single author over a year, analyzing the number of invitations, the subject areas of the inviting journals and their characteristics.MethodsAn analysis of all invitations to publication, received during 12 months, was carried out in order to analyze their number, the area of specialization, the presence in reputable databases, publication criteria and presence in the Beall's list.ResultsA total of 864 invitations had been received at the end of the 12 months, all with open access policies. Ninety-nine were from journals not on Beall's list. Eight were indexed on reputable databases. The thematic areas were distributed as follows: 370 dental, 346 medical, 122 unspecified subject, 26 non-medical.ConclusionsPredatory publishing is spreading in dentistry. Poor-quality articles and, at the same time, loss of potentially valuable researches could seriously pollute the scientific evidence that founds dental clinical practice.