Open Access Publishing and Scholarship

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

SPARC

http://sparcopen.org/

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Melinda Malik, Head of Reference & Instructional Services, Saint Anselm College

The prohibitive costs of periodicals, textbooks and other scholarly materials are well known to librarians, researchers, and students alike. The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) is an international organization that seeks to address this and other concerns by improving access to the world's knowledge through open research and data sharing. Since its founding in 1998, the organization has grown to include over 200 members comprising college and universities in the United States and Canada, as well as library organization affiliates and global affiliates representing Europe, Japan, and Africa.

SPARC is actively engaged in promoting open initiatives and policies with governments and public and private institutions around the world. For example, SPARC recently recommended that the White House adopt a policy of “open licensing requirement for educational materials and other copyrightable works created through direct grant programs” (Allen, 2015). In December 2015, the U.S. Department of Education initiated its first steps in this direction.

Librarians interested in learning more about or participating in the movement toward open access, open education, and open data will benefit from the information provided on SPARC's website. For members and nonmembers alike, the recently redesigned website provides user friendly information about open access policies, initiatives, news and events, and various helpful resources that promote and support the expansion of open access to journals, textbooks, and research data. For example, users may access an Open Access Spectrum Evaluation Tool, which will enable them to evaluate any research publication that describes itself as open access with a rubric and score the publication on a 100-point scale. With varying degrees of openness, this tool allows users to better understand the extent to which any given publication is open.

Information provided in their policy statements and factsheets will help librarians prepare open access, open data, or open education project plans to present to campus stakeholders in order to gain support. According to one member, SPARC has been the most influential organization in her professional career, helping her stay current with new programs and initiatives in open access and scholarly communication, as well as prepare and plan for outreach activities on campus through their biannual meetings (E. Exline, personal communication, February 15, 2016).

Overall, the website is easy to use and intuitive, with a few exceptions. The Events page lists upcoming programs, but it either does not provide access to or does not make obvious how to access past program information. SPARC also moderates a helpful public email discussion list, SPARC Libraries & OER Forum, available to members and non-members alike; however, access to the list is not readily apparent on their website or Contact Us page.

In Short: All academic librarians will benefit from visiting the SPARC website to learn more about open access, open education, open data policies and initiatives, and ways to participate in the efforts “to make open the default for research and education” (Joseph, 2016). Access to resources and tools, policies and initiatives, and news and events will provide librarians with a vast array of information that they can use to promote “open” projects on their own campuses.

Highly Recommended.

REFERENCES

Allen, N. (2015, December 22). Open education community responds to ED open licensing policy. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/news/2015/open-education-community-responds-to-ed-open-licensing-policy/

Joseph, H. (2016, January 12). We've made a few big changes at SPARC. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/news/2016/big-changes-at-sparc/

SPARC. (2015). Open access spectrum evaluation tool. Retrieved from http://www.oaspectrum.org/

Harvard Open Access Tracking Project

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/hoap/Open_Access_Tracking_Project

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Shalu Gillum, Head of Public Services, Harriet F. Ginsburg Health Sciences Library, University of Central Florida College of Medicine.

The Harvard Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) monitors new developments in open access research. The two-fold mission of the project is to provide real-time alerts for open access information and to organize that information by tag or subtopic. OATP was started in 2009 by Peter Suber, director of the Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication and director of the Harvard Open Access Project.

OATP uses “social tagging” to develop feeds for new open access (OA) developments. Readers of the various feeds, one primary and hundreds of smaller secondary feeds, tag content they find on the Internet related to open access in order to organize the overwhelming volume of information available. The main OATP site is basically a wiki, with not much content. Users can read the helpful FAQs, see a list of generally accepted tags and tagging conventions, and read about future plans for the project. The true “meat” of OATP is found in the feeds; a link to the feeds is provided on the home page. The overall OATP hub containing all of tagged content since 2009 is found at http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/items. A single primary feed contains information on new OA developments, while secondary feeds have been created for various subtopics, or project tags, for example, oa.libraries. Some feeds contain mashups, or combinations of project tags. Feeds are also available in several formats, including HTML, RSS, e-mail, Twitter, and more.

To accomplish the social tagging, OATP uses open-source software written specifically for the project called TagTeam, which also stores all of the OATP tag records and generates the various feeds. Readers can assist in building the feeds by participating in the project as a tagger. A link to a tagging manual is provided on the FAQ page.

While the primary and secondary feeds are not searchable, the main OATP hub is searchable using the TagTeam search engine. Content on the primary and secondary feeds is organized by date, with the most recent tagged content visible at the top. Each entry on the feed contains a summary of the information, a link to the original content on the internet, and the various assigned tags. These tags are also clickable, and readers can then follow secondary feeds on a particular subject. All information is also cross-linked by tagger and date so readers can view content tagged by a particular person or all of the content tagged on the same date.

In Short: The Harvard Open Access Tracking Project is a comprehensive collection of open access news and information. Content is painstakingly cross-referenced. OATP is an excellent resource for scholarly communications librarians in academia, as well as for academic public services librarians. It is also a great place for anyone to keep up with the latest developments in the field of open access.

Highly Recommended.

ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit

http://acrl.ala.org/scholcomm/

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Lora L. Smallman, Humanities Librarian, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Scholarly Communication Toolkit aims to equip academic librarians with resources for advocating for change and nurturing the evolution of scholarly communication. This educational resource is perhaps one of the most critical and timely resources for academic librarians navigating the landscape of open access publishing and scholarship because of new federal and state mandates. As an example, Illinois passed the Open Access to Research Articles Act in 2013 in an effort to make scholarship more accessible. Researchers at Illinois public universities are now required by law and university policies to make their research articles freely available (i.e., in open access journals, institutional repositories, or other open access options) (Open Access to Research Articles Act, 2013). On a federal level, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) now requires any and all scholarship produced from NIH grant-funded projects to be published in an open access format (McIntire, 2015).

Open access laws present a challenge to researchers who may prefer to publish in a non-open access journal for reasons such as prestige or established relationships. Nevertheless, with this challenge comes an opportunity for librarians to partner with and support researchers in understanding their options for open access publishing. The ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit can assist librarians who are helping researchers comply with rules and mandates, and it also provides background and rationale for these initiatives.

The web design for the toolkit is clean and intuitive. The main navigation spans the width of the header, and, in addition to the Home button, consists of eight tabs, some with drop-down menus. These eight tabs are labeled Authors’ Rights, Repositories, Economics, Scholarly Publishing, Digital Humanities, Data Management, Take Action, and Contribute. Readers can gather not only background information for each of these topics but also understand ACRL’s stance or efforts in each area. The last tab, Contribute, is where librarians can offer additional resources, ideas, and their voice in the conversation. Open access publishing is listed in the scholarly publishing drop-down menu. On the right-hand side of the website is “Scholarly Communication Tools,” which is a place to explore additional resources such as blogs, presentations, videos, and webinars.

While the toolkit is now maintained and regularly updated by the ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee, this project originated in 2005 under the direction of librarian Karen Williams, dean of the University of Arizona Libraries. Williams collaborated with another librarian at the University of Arizona, Adam Engelsgjerd, to design the website, and worked with members of the ACRL Scholarly Communications Committee (former name of the ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee) to gather and organize content (Williams, 2005). Williams considered the toolkit a “living document,” and visiting the website today shows nearly all the pages have been updated within the past year.

In Short: Amid an evolving scholarly environment, it is pertinent for academic public services librarians to familiarize themselves with open access publishing and scholarship; the ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit is a comprehensive place to begin learning and later to reference.

Highly Recommended.

REFERENCES

McIntire, M. E. (2015). Librarians leap to the aid of researchers whose funding will soon depend on open access. Chronicle of Higher Education, 61. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Librarians-Leap-to-the-Aid-of/231997

Open Access to Research Articles Act, 110 ILCS 61 (2013).

Williams, K. (2005). The ACRL scholarly communications toolkit now online. College & Research Libraries News, 66(3), 199–201.

SHERPA RoMEO

www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo

SHERPA JULIET

http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Elizabeth Price, Research and Instruction Librarian, Murray State University

SHERPA RoMEO is a searchable database of publishers’ policies to help academic researchers self-archive their work without violating their publishing agreements. Its companion site, SHERPA JULIET, is a database of funding agencies’ grant conditions that are related to the self-archiving or open access publishing of research publications and data. Both tools are based at the University of Nottingham and are part of how SHERPA Services “is investigating issues in the future of scholarly communication” (SHERPA, 2016).

Of the two, RoMEO is relevant to a wider variety of researchers. Its primary goal is eliminating confusion for authors who support open access or want to make their peer-reviewed scholarship available to a wider audience. Using the basic search function, one can search by journal title, partial journal title, ISSN, or publisher. RoMEO does not apply to book publication agreements.

RoMEO uses colors to code different levels of self-archiving permissions. They apply to pre-prints (the draft of a manuscript submitted for peer-review), post-prints (the version of the manuscript submitted for printing after peer-review), and the publisher's version/PDF (the version of record that is published on the publisher's website). Green is the most open access friendly, indicating that an author can archive the preprint and postprint or publisher’s version/PDF. Next is blue, which indicates an author can archive either the postprint or publisher’s version/PDF. Yellow indicates an author can archive only the preprint. Last is white, indicating that the publisher does not formally support archiving.

SHERPA assumes most researchers understand the distinctions between the various versions of an article. Providing more explicit, easier to locate definitions and even examples of a pre-print, post-print and publisher's version of a sample article would be beneficial.

Another minor quibble about the RoMEO color scheme is the inclusion of green and yellow (gold). These colors are not used the same way that green and gold are used in other open access discussion. This could cause confusion and may need to be explained to users.

After locating a journal title, the display entry includes the RoMEO assigned color, details about paid OA options, the date the entry was last updated, and any conditions that the publisher applies to the archiving (such as publishing only in an institutional repository; requiring a link to the publisher version; or prohibiting the use of the publisher’s version/PDF). The information on each entry is easy to understand, is organized to aid comprehension, and is well documented with links to original publishing policies or supporting materials.

According to the website, the RoMEO database consists of 2,183 publishers and more than 22,000 journals from around the world (at the time of this review). Journal information is provided through the British Library’s Zetoc, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Entrez. Community contributors also provide updates to existing policies and users can suggest or request journals to add.

An advanced search function allows users to search by RoMEO assigned publisher ID, RoMEO color level, and update date. Currently RoMEO is available in English, Hungarian, Dutch, Portuguese, and Spanish.

In essence, RoMEO is a tool that savvy researchers can use to “shop” journals for more favorable distribution options by comparing the permissions and policies of each journal they are considering before submitting their article for publication. For an article already published, RoMEO can clarify how it can be shared online in order to prevent any takedown notices. However, authors should remember that RoMEO is only a guide and that their signed contract may trump more recent publisher policies.

The companion site, SHERPA JULIET mostly appeals to academic researchers who do grant-funded studies. It allows the user to search by country or by funder, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Once a grant-making organization is selected, the entry breaks down the policies for both research data and the resulting publications (separated into archiving restrictions, publishing restrictions, and general conditions). This information is drawn from funding agencies’ policies and updated by community contributors. Links to the original policy and supporting information are included on each entry. JULIET leaves researchers with no ambiguities about what kind of archiving is required for their publications and data. Unfortunately, it covers only the largest foundations in the United States. Users can provide information about additional funders through the site's Notification Form.

In Short: Public services librarians in academic settings who are fielding questions about self-archiving, data archiving, or grant mandates should refer researchers to SHERPA RoMEO and JULIET before they post to subject or institutional repositories or apply for grants.

Highly Recommended.

REFERENCES

SHERPA. (2016). University of Nottingham. Retrieved from http://sherpa.ac.uk/

New York Public Library Public Domain Digital Collections

http://www.nypl.org/research/collections/digital-collections/public-domain

Metropolitan Museum of Art's Open Access for Scholarly Content (OSAC)

http://www.metmuseum.org/research/image-resources/frequently-asked-questions

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Margot Hanson, Instruction & Outreach Librarian, California State University – Maritime Academy

In today's remix culture, copyright lines can easily become blurred when it comes to visual media. Creative Commons licenses and Google Images search limits by usage rights help provide access to materials available for reuse, but it is also useful to have clear destinations for open access visual content. Although libraries and other public institutions have been providing open access digitized visual materials for quite a while (with projects such as The Flickr Commons), the two sites under review have recently made specific efforts to further increase access to images for publishing and scholarship.

The New York Public Library (NYPL) has had an extensive digital collection of visual materials available online for many years. In early 2016, NYPL announced a decision to make digital items in the public domain available for free high-resolution download, which increased access to more than 187,000 items. This is part of an effort by NYPL to encourage creative reuse of the digital collections by researchers, students, academics, artists, and others. Before this policy shift, the images were available to view on the NYPL Digital Collections site, but the high-resolution images were only available by request and for a fee. As of this review, the NYPL Digital Collections comprises approximately 674,000 items (an ever-growing number), 193,000 of which are in the public domain.

The high-resolution items include a wide variety of materials digitized from the NYPL collections, including prints, photographs, text, music, maps, streaming video, and other types of material. The site provides a keyword search, or users can browse options by items, collections, or divisions. The homepage also features various spotlight images and collections grouped into larger themes to give visitors a glimpse of what they will encounter on the site. From the results screen, sorting is available by title, date created, date digitized, and sequence. Filters provide further refinement by topic, name, collection, place, genre, publisher, division, type, and date range. A convenient checkbox at the top of the results page limits results to show only those items that have been designated as public domain. The overall look and feel of the site is clean and user-friendly, which can be a challenge for databases of digitized materials.

NYPL Labs have put together a few digital experiments related to these public domain materials to help users immerse themselves in the collections. Visitors to the site can help transcribe historical menus and geotag the restaurant locations, create and share stereograph images from the digital collections, rectify historical maps in contemporary mapping software, and identify buildings and other landmarks on historical maps of New York City. NYPL Labs have also created a visualization of the entire public domain collection, allowing the curious to browse tiny thumbnails grouped by century created, genre, collection, and even color. For those who want to go meta, Digital Collections metadata is available via API, or by bulk download via the Digital Public Library of America. Another useful feature provided by the NYPL is a blog post suggesting possible uses of the public domain collection in the classroom (http://www.nypl.org/blog/2016/01/20/public-domain-in-the-classroom) to navigate such topics as knowledge organization, history of the United States, civil rights, immigration, and many other issues.

Another site providing increased access to public domain images for scholars and students is the online collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art (the Met). In May 2014, the Met unveiled the Open Access for Scholarly Content (OASC) initiative, providing free access for non-commercial use to 400,000 digital images of public domain works. As of this review, the Met's online collection includes 423,293 records, but it is unclear how many of them are public domain. Visitors to the site can browse by artist, type, geography, date, and department. There is a keyword search option, and the results page provides the same limits as the browsable categories, with the addition of selecting only artworks on display or only artworks with images available.

Unfortunately, the search interface for The Met does not provide an easy limit option to view only materials that are covered by the OASC initiative. Users must select a specific image to find out if includes the OASC identifier in the record. As such, there is no easy way to give an estimate of the number of images of public domain works. Similar to the shift in the NYPL open-access policy, prior to the OASC initiative, the Met provided images of public domain works only by request and for a fee. Now, the images of public domain works may be published in scholarly publications of any media, without permission from the museum and at no cost. An additional option for academic and scholarly publication of images from the Met's collection is available via Images for Academic Publishing (IAP), hosted by Artstor since 2007. Individuals affiliated with Artstor-subscribing institutions can identify images that are part of this initiative by adding [IAP] to their search terms within Artstor.

These initiatives and open access policy changes by NYPL and the Met are part of a broader trend toward open access of public domain images and other materials. Libraries have been at the forefront of efforts to increase access to information for many years, and even for-profit institutions like Getty Images are joining in. Although they have not gone so far as offering their images as open access, the photo service announced in March 2014 that their images would be available for free sharing with a built-in embed code.

In Short: Open access image collections allow for many uses. This review has primarily focused on image use for scholarly publication, but there are a wide variety of other uses applicable to libraries and academic institutions. Images from collections such as NYPL and the Met supply opportunities for the creation of promotional materials for libraries. Open access image collections can spur discussions with faculty members about the importance of open access scholarship and issues in academic publishing. Additionally, the topics of open access and public domain furnish an excellent framework for visual literacy instruction as well as copyright lessons and discussions with students.

Highly Recommended: New York Public Library Digital Collections Public Domain Collection.

Recommended: Metropolitan Museum of Art Open Access for Scholarly Content (OASC).

PLOS (Public Library of Science)

https://www.plos.org/

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Megan P. Smith, Coordinator of Technical Services Librarian/Assistant Professor, Kemp Library, East Stroudsburg University

Open access content is something that everyone appears to be looking for these days, whether it is software, courses, or research articles. For the majority of libraries whose funding has been cut, the search for open access resources for patrons has become imperative with so many paid resources becoming too costly to continue subscriptions. Fortunately, publishers such as the Public Library of Science (PLOS) understand how important open access is and are meeting very real needs in professional and research communities. PLOS, a nonprofit organization, was founded in 2001 and became a publisher in 2003 with the goal of making scholarly research available to everyone worldwide. PLOS’ publications publish primary research from all science and medical disciplines; articles are rigorously reported, peer-reviewed, and 100% open access.

At the time of this review, PLOS academic journals include PLOS ONE, PLOS Biology, PLOS Medicine, PLOS Computational Biology, PLOS Genetics, PLOS Pathogens, and PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. Each journal is available via its home page, and the layouts on all of the pages are modern, clean, and easy to navigate. All of the PLOS publication pages share a similar layout, making it easy to transition from one to another and find elements like the search bar, new content, prior editions, submission information, and more. Finding and accessing articles is breezily simple, as is downloading, printing, or sharing the article via email, social media or a variety of other sites, including Reddit. Each article also contains subject area keywords, recommendations for similar articles, and Article-Level Metrics that include measures of online usage, citations from scholarly literature, social bookmarks, and more. These metrics allow for an indication of quality and “impact” of an individual article, instead of relying on only the journal's quality and its “impact” factor. Research is not limited to that done in the United States either, but is accepted from worldwide sources, including low- and middle-income countries. PLOS also provides financial assistance to authors who cannot pay part or all of their publication fees. PLOS also has more than two million scientists, scholars, and clinicians visit their site every month, making it incredibly well read.

In addition to their peer-reviewed journals, PLOS provides PLOS Blogs for staff and the community to encourage debate, as well as PLOS Currents and PLOS Collections. PLOS Currents is not a journal but an innovative new approach to online publishing that aims to provide a shorter publishing timeframe for new scientific research. Content is still peer-reviewed, but on a faster time-table, and articles are published immediately after editorial acceptance and publicly archived at PubMed Central. PLOS Collections curates previously published content with the goal of “demonstrating innovative approaches to the assessment, organization and reuse of research, data and commentary” (“Publications,” n.d.).

In Short: PLOS is a well-designed and supported open access publisher with an easy to use website and high degree of academic standards, making them a trustworthy scholarly resource. Usable by anyone with internet access, this is a robust and highly professional set of open access publications sharing the latest research in science and medicine that any library should add to their online reference resources.

Highly Recommended.

REFERENCES

Publications. (n.d.) PLOS. Retrieved from https://www.plos.org/publications/

Directory of Open Access Journals

http://www.doaj.org

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Cori Strickler, Information Literacy Librarian, Bridgewater College

One of the concerns with open access scholarship is the ability to identify quality sources from those that are more dubious. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) was launched in 2003 with the purpose of increasing the visibility of open access scholarly journals. It maintains a list of accepted open access (OA) journals on its website; currently, there are over 11,000 journals in the directory from over 300 countries. Beyond providing a clearinghouse for vetted scholarly journals, DOAJ also informs the OA community by providing high quality resources covering the definitions of open access and its many issues. The site has also added to the scholarly publishing profession by creating its own best practices to help define what it means to be quality open access material, and by maintaining a transparent process by which it adds and deletes journals from the directory.

For researchers, DOAJ categorizes each journal by subject using the Library of Congress classifications. Keyword search is also available for the over 7,000 journals searchable at the article level. The journal entries provide information on the publisher, country of publisher, language, date added to DOAJ, and other relevant information. Article level journals also provide “table of contents” information for individual issues.

To have a journal added to the Directory, publishers must fill out an application and adhere to guidelines informed by the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Associations “Code of Conduct” (available at: http://oaspa.org/membership/code-of-conduct/) and DOAJ's own “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing” (available at: https://doaj.org/bestpractice). A volunteer staff reviews each application before acceptance, and the site is constantly adding and removing journals based on whether they adhere to these criteria. The site's FAQ also address its position on “predatory” journals, and describes the process by which you can alert them of questionable journals. The Directory also takes the step to certify journals that “achieve a high level of openness, adhere to Best Practice and high publishing standards” by affixing a Seal of Approval so researchers can identify them within the site (FAQ, 2016).

DOAJ's Best Practices, along with other information on the website, help inform the appropriate creation of OA journals and help to maintain a level of acceptable quality that is sometimes lacking in OA. Their Open Access Information page provides an overview on open access and information for publishers and authors interested in producing open access content.

In Short: The DOAJ is an excellent resource for researchers wanting to identify high quality open access resources in their particular disciplines and subject area. It also provides publishers and authors with examples of best practices for the OA publishing model.

Highly Recommended.

REFERENCES

FAQ. (2016). Directory of open access journals. Retrieved from https://doaj.org/faq#seal

ThinkCheckSubmit

http://thinkchecksubmit.org/

Visited: Winter 2016

Reviewer: Alyssa Brissett, Lehman Access and Reserves Supervisor, Lehman Social Sciences Library, Columbia University

Selecting the right journal for publication can be an overwhelming process, particularly for early career librarians and researchers. ThinkCheckSubmit is a free resource designed to help alleviate some of the anxieties of that process. The tool was launched to help researchers identify credible journals in which to share their research. It is produced by a team of publishers and representatives from several organizations, including BioMed Central, Springer Nature, and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), in response to recent occurrences of “predatory” publishing.

In recent years, new publishing services and outlets have cropped up, largely due to the popularity of the Internet. There are numerous stories of deceptive publishing or publishers who prey on uninformed researchers who are eager to share their work. “Predatory” journals will intentionally use existing journal names to attract new researchers; the researchers will send in their work and pay publication fees, only to find that their work is not published (Beall, 2012). How can early career librarians and researchers navigate this issue? ThinkCheckSubmit provides these users with a checklist that helps them review journals for possible publication.

The site is simply designed. On the home page, there is a short animated video that further explains the process and defines some of the questions and thoughts that go into each stage of choosing a journal for publication. There are clearly labeled tabs and a sidebar of news related to the site's launching. ThinkCheckSubmit also features an FAQ section that answers questions related to the site's purpose. Academic libraries can get involved and promote this new resource by following the site's social media accounts as well as advertising with premade posters available for download.

ThinkCheckSubmit aims to direct new researchers to trustworthy sources but does not promote specific journals. Instead, they encourage users to think and ask themselves important questions about open access, the journal's industry recognition, article indexing, and professionalism. New researchers and early career librarians benefit from making informed decisions. As the number of online journals and publishers increase, so does the likelihood of deception.

In Short: ThinkCheckSubmit is very relevant considering the conversations surrounding open access and predatory publishers. It is an appropriate tool for public services librarians to promote to students, faculty and scholars who are interested in publishing their research and may not be well versed on the intricacies of the publishing world. It empowers vulnerable users, who may not be aware of the dangers to their research, to make an informed decision regarding the credibility of scholarly journals.

Recommended.

REFERENCES

Beall, J. (2012, August 1). Predatory publishing. The Scientist. Retrieved from http://www.thescientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32426/title/Predatory-Publishing/