15 Responses to New Open-Access Oncology Journal Has Big Ambitions

  1. Yurii says:

    In addition to this as far as know the real William Brown from Colorado is not an oncologist.

    • Guido B says:

      Well, Dr. Brown’s Linkedin page (which presumably is genuine) describes him as a “medical editor” and links to his editing services company MES. The company’s blog mentions both his appointment as Editor-in-Chief of Cancer Research Frontiers, and the editorial (http://imesmeded.com/blog-2/). The announcement of the appointment as editor was made by one Dr. Michael Yang, who describes himself as “Managing Editor of Cancer Research Frontiers”.

      • Yes, and I also noticed that on the contact us page for International Medical Editing Service the address given is a university address. I know that if I started a business and used a university address I would immediately be contacted.

  2. Dear Prof. Brown says:

    I think it is excellent to have these new titles displayed clearly on Beall’s blog, like cattle who have just been branded for the errors that they are displaying. This is important, because, like the true predators they are, they adapt and adjust as they advance, cleaning up these initial errors, making their operations look more genuine as time goes by. Their hope is that the public and scientists are too busy to remember what their birth and emergence into science publishing looked like. Let’s now hope that Prof. Brown responds, preferably with a copy of the e-mail he received to invite him to the position of EIC of this new journal. A close look at the scandals plaguing the field of cancer research, as shown by the wave of retractions (see Retraction Watch), may have been the spark that ignited this journal, and the “predatory” nature may be on the frustrations that some cancer researchers are having with traditional, leading cancer journals, who appear to have failed traditional peer review. The face of publishing is getting uglier and uglier by the day, and this gives the perfect impetus for these new start-ups to gain traction. Quickly.

  3. Dave Langers says:

    One editorial with what provisionally seems like a unrequested gift-authorship? This could force a funny retraction:
    “After substantial authorship issues were pointed out by dr. Brown, the journal editor, dr. Brown, hereby retracts this paper despite objections from the first author, dr. Brown.”

  4. I did a quick check on the editorial and – I must admit – it seems to be original material. Not plagiarized. And quite well written.

    I’m shocked!

  5. Mohammad says:

    Hi Jeffrey, check out this website:

    It is hijacked. its been around for at least a year. I sent an email to the actual website but they did not respond. Many are falling victim to it. Please inform people.

  6. Mohammad says:

    Also, another thing. I have seen some journals that are in the NLM catalog and so, they pretend that they are in pubmed. These scams raises big concerns for me because they get a lot of money of people but dont seem to provide their end of the deal.

  7. Mohammad says:

    This one is also hijacked: http://www.cadmo.org is the fake website and this seems to be the original one.
    This time I carefully checked your list. Here’s the original one:

    • Mohammad, Thank you very much for letting me know about this. I have confirmed that it’s a hijacking (there’s a notice on the legitimate journal’s website) and added it to the list. I appreciate your help. –Jeffrey

  8. nasser says:

    Its not in your list, I recognised the following points.
    1. Impact Factor (ISI) = 0.3079 Scientific Journal Impact Factor
    (SJIF) indexing, its not real one.
    2. In their email they said; indexed By Scopus, EyeSource
    and DRJI Google Scholars. Never i found it in Scopus may be I missed it and the other is not real indexing.
    3. Contact page dosnt working, may be my computer not good.

  9. Jesper says:

    Hi Jeffrey,

    First, great site – appreciate the work.

    I have just read through this post and comments. I see you them on your list – have you confirmed that this is a predator journal? Seemed to be debatable above.

    On the one hand, I can see they have listet a few more publications on their site, and these are now given “DOI” and indexed on google scholar, at least. I have also searched some of the authors listet for the papers on the site, and as far as I can see, they have several pubmed-indexed publications.

    However I still don’t see them listet as a COPE member (although I can’t see they claim to be anymore), and the “managing editor”, Michael Wang, figuring in the email, is not listet on the site – and the editorial board still seems questionable.

    Maybe best just to avoid it, I guess…

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: