Abstract
In an article in the online business magazine Forbes ,1 Salzberg called Acupuncture in Medicine ( AiM ) a ‘fake journal’. If true, this would be embarrassing for BMJ (publisher) and the BMAS (owner), and insulting to the reviewers and editorial board, all of whom are committed to AiM’s scientific integrity. I aim to counter Salzberg’s accusation with some facts from the journal activity in 2015/6, a period which covers the current and previous editors. The usual meaning of a ‘fake’ journal is one whose editorial board and peer review system are fictional, whose funding is not transparent, and which accepts articles for publication simply because the author pays. So Salzberg accuses AiM’s publishers of ‘being more concerned about their bottom line than about scientific integrity’. But payment for open access is optional, reviewers and editors are blinded to payment, and payment was made for only 17% of AiM’s papers in 2015/6. The journal website2 will confirm the authenticity of AiM’s editorial boards and the transparency of its funding, and also show that the journal: is widely indexed, including by Medline; is a …
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Acupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
