With an inflationary upcoming of new ‘online’ journals in all scientific fields the responsibility of well-reputed scientific journals (like the Acta ORL) increases.
This applies to peer-reviewers that have to really thoroughly and carefully like the Acta Oto-Laryngologica. What makes it very difficult is the fact, that especially citations have to be checked, as in many papers they are just quoted from headlines or abstracts and very often do not actually correspond with the statements of the authors. This means that peer-reviewing is even more time-consuming, thus the publication process cannot be finished in the desired short time. On the other hand, ‘fake-journals’ and many of the new online journals that ask for high fees from authors promise ‘fast-reviewing’, meaning, that in most cases a real review does not take place anymore or reviewers, that are critical and reject papers, are no longer invited for reviews.
But the main responsibility applies to authors and scientists to thoroughly prepare their publications, read and quote the used citations carefully and present their data in full and not only excerpts that underline their theses. It is completely irresponsible, when publications are submitted to a well-known journal and are rejected there with large and substantial comments, and these authors submit the same paper unchanged to another journal, hoping it will be not checked as thoroughly and get accepted – and pitifully this sometimes happens.
There definitely is a high pressure on (medical) scientists to publish much and fast, but the quality of scientific research is crucial for medicine and its outcome: the best knowledge and therapy for our patients!
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).