The 1-h fraud detection challenge

[CSP in 40 years of scientific publications]

In 2024, Cadernos de Saúde Pública (CSP) celebrates 40 years of uninterrupted publications. This article analyzes the trajectory of the journal and projects its future considering contemporary challenges in scientific publishing in the field of Public Health. This study was based on the analysis of main editorial policy milestones and the identification of the most popular topics. Three periods were recognized. In the "beginning" (1985 to 1990), the journal had restricted circulation, with a quarterly frequency. The word "epidemiology", used in a descriptive context, is highlighted. Then, in the period of "consolidation" (1991 to October 2012), CSP was indexed in the Index Medicus-MEDLINE database and had its online collection published by the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), expanding the reach of articles. In this period, the words that characterize the field of policy, planning, and management were clearly seen, and terms related to the epidemiological method emerged. The period of "diversity" (November 2012 to November 2023) introduced the requirement of an external editor to the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation's staff among the three co-editors-in-chief, aiming to ensure editorial independence. New activities and a similar frequency among the five most common terms highlight such "diversity". Several issues are observed in scientific publishing in 2024: non-commercial Open Science, artificial intelligence, appreciation of science, scientific dissemination, among others. Addressing new challenges in an ethical and transparent manner will allow future advances, maintaining CSP's credibility among authors and readers and its commitment to improvements in the living and health conditions of populations.

How to fight fake papers: a review on important information sources and steps towards solution of the problem

Scientific fake papers, containing manipulated or completely fabricated data, are a problem that has reached dramatic dimensions. Companies known as paper mills (or more bluntly as "criminal science publishing gangs") produce and sell such fake papers on a large scale. The main drivers of the fake paper flood are the pressure in academic systems and (monetary) incentives to publish in respected scientific journals and sometimes the personal desire for increased "prestige." Published fake papers cause substantial scientific, economic, and social damage. There are numerous information sources that deal with this topic from different points of view. This review aims to provide an overview of these information sources until June 2024. Much more original research with larger datasets is needed, for example on the extent and impact of the fake paper problem and especially on how to detect them, as many findings are based more on small datasets, anecdotal evidence, and assumptions. A long-term solution would be to overcome the mantra of publication metrics for evaluating scientists in academia.

Metadata analysis of retracted fake papers in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology

An increasing fake paper problem is a cause for concern in the scientific community. These papers look scientific but contain manipulated data or are completely fictitious. So-called paper mills produce fake papers on a large scale and publish them in the name of people who buy authorship. The aim of this study was to learn more about the characteristics of fake papers at the metadata level. We also investigated whether some of these characteristics could be used to detect fake papers. For that purpose, we examined metadata of 12 fake papers that were retracted by Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology (NSAP) in recent years. We also compared many of these metadata with those of a reference group of 733 articles published by NSAP. It turned out that in many characteristics the fake papers we examined did not differ substantially from the other articles. It was only noticeable that the fake papers came almost exclusively from a certain country, used non-institutional email addresses more often than average, and referenced dubious literature significantly more often. However, these three features are only of limited use in identifying fake papers. We were also able to show that fake papers not only contaminate the scientific record while they are unidentified but also continue to do so even after retraction. Our results indicate that fake papers are well made and resemble honest papers even at the metadata level. Because they contaminate the scientific record in the long term and this cannot be fully contained even by their retraction, it is particularly important to identify them before publication. Further research on the topic of fake papers is therefore urgently needed.

Bibliometric development of Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology

Motivated by the 150-year anniversary of the Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology in 2023, we studied the bibliometric development of the journal. We evaluated data from Editorial Reports, Clarivate, and Springer Nature databases. Several parameters representing the journal's performance, such as the impact factor and social impact, were analyzed over the years. We analyzed the journal's meta-data and wrote an algorithm to retrieve cities and countries of origin. We could see a decrease in publications from Germany and an increase in papers from Brazil, China, Egypt, and Iran during the last years. The decrease in publications from Germany is probably a zeitgeist effect because this country places a strong emphasis on high-impact factor papers for academic promotion and winning grants. Germany was the country with the most publications throughout the 100 most-cited articles. Most of these articles were published between 1970 and 1990, when neurotransmitters were the most published topic. Klaus Starke (Freiburg) and Manfred Göthert (Bonn) were prominent drivers of this field. The most common topics nowadays are "Drugs for the Treatment of Malignant Tumor Diseases" and "Immunopharmacology." The internationality of the journal substantially increased after introduction of English as mandatory language in the 1970s. The journal also experienced substantial COVID-19 pandemic-related effects. This paper is not only of relevance for the field of pharmacology but for science in general in the sense that Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology is a case study for profound changes in a traditional scientific journal, requiring permanent adjustment by editors, referees, publisher, authors, and readers alike. The development of the journal has been strongly influenced by historic and political developments, cultural attitudes (zeitgeist), language changes, global changes in research topics, and eminent individuals who published many papers in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology.

A Synthesis of the Formats for Correcting Erroneous and Fraudulent Academic Literature, and Associated Challenges

Academic publishing is undergoing a highly transformative process, and many established rules and value systems that are in place, such as traditional peer review (TPR) and preprints, are facing unprecedented challenges, including as a result of post-publication peer review. The integrity and validity of the academic literature continue to rely naively on blind trust, while TPR and preprints continue to fail to effectively screen out errors, fraud, and misconduct. Imperfect TPR invariably results in imperfect papers that have passed through varying levels of rigor of screening and validation. If errors or misconduct were not detected during TPR's editorial screening, but are detected at the post-publication stage, an opportunity is created to correct the academic record. Currently, the most common forms of correcting the academic literature are errata, corrigenda, expressions of concern, and retractions or withdrawals. Some additional measures to correct the literature have emerged, including manuscript versioning, amendments, partial retractions and retract and replace. Preprints can also be corrected if their version is updated. This paper discusses the risks, benefits and limitations of these forms of correcting the academic literature.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10838-022-09607-4.