Home > Journals > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio > Past Issues > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2021 Giugno;17(2) > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2021 Giugno;17(2):67-71

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

EDITORIALE   Freefree

La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2021 Giugno;17(2):67-71

DOI: 10.23736/S1825-859X.21.00106-7

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: Italian

Predatory meetings

Piero CAPPELLETTI 1 , Nicola BIZZARO 2, Romolo M. DORIZZI 3

1 SIPMeL, Castelfranco Veneto, Treviso, Italia; 2 Laboratorio di Patologia Clinica, Ospedale Sant’Antonio, Tolmezzo - Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Udine, Udine, Italia; 3 UOC Patologia Clinica, Laboratorio Unico della Romagna, Pievesestina di Cesena, Forlì-Cesena, Italia



Predatory meetings (conferences, congresses, summit) are meetings set up to appear as legitimate scientific conferences, but which are commercially exploitative as they request fees also for active presence (speaker, chairman, committee), do not provide proper editorial control over presentations, and advertising can include claims of involvement of prominent academics who are unaware. Often the organizers of predatory conferences are publishers of predatory journals. It represents two faces of the same coin. The predominant characteristics, taken from the literature, are described. The high number of ways in which these meetings are called and the high number of characteristics they may possess show that the case of predatory conferences is not well defined, is ambiguous in its presentation and elusive in its responsibilities. The “questionable conferences” have been proliferating in the last five years. Most searches attest to at least one e-mail per day with an unsolicited invitation to this type of conference. Young professionals are the most vulnerable to the traps of predatory congresses. Scholars who know or at least suspect that these conferences may not be legitimate but still participate are part of the problem. The basic defense is to increase awareness of the problem and of the professional risks involved. First, the consultation of the blacklist of Caltech (California Institute of Technology) should be encouraged. Second, many organizations also suggest checklists to autonomously assess the security level of an event; particularly interesting and fast that of the “Think. Check. Attend. Initiative.” In conclusion, awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon is necessary in order not to waste money, time and reputation. Institutions and universities should not host predatory conferences and should take the necessary measures against researchers who attend or organize such conferences. Scientific Societies should warn their members of this danger, in no way offer support to these commercial initiatives and promote defenses against them (blacklist and checklist).


KEY WORDS: Peer-review; Checklist; Congress

top of page