Choosing the scientific journal for publishing research work: perceptions of medical and dental researchers
Open accessAbstract
Background and aim. With the increasing demand to publish due to ‘publish or perish’ culture among research and academic institutions, the choice of a journal for publishing scientific articles becomes very important. A publication with many citations and high impact factor can propel researchers in their academic careers. The aim of this study is to explore the perceptions of medical and dental researchers in India about the important criteria to consider while selecting scientific journals for publishing their research.Methods. 206 faculty staff members from three medical and five dental institutions were selected through convenience sampling. The study participants completed a questionnaire with 24 closed ended questions on various factors related to journal selection for publication. Factors such as publication frequency, journal citation, indexing, peer-review, impact factor, publication fees, acceptance or rejection rate, publishing house, previous submission and online submission process were considered. The responses were recorded using a Likert scale. Cronbach’s alpha as a measure of internal consistency or homogeneity was 0.909. Descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U test were employed for comparison of responses among study participants.Results. The mean weight of 24 criteria on a scale of 0 to 4 varied between 2.13 and 3.45. The results showed that indexing of journal (3.45±0.74), online submission (3.24±0.83), impact factor (3.11±0.91), peer-review process (3.0±1.02) and publication fees (2.99±1.11) were among the most important criteria to consider in journal selection.Conclusions Of the 24 factors considered by health researchers for journal selection, the most important were Journal indexing, online submission, impact factor, peer-review and publication fees. Compared to dental researchers, medical researchers perceived open access and peer-review process as significantly more important criteria.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
High publication fees, coupled with restricted access to prestigious journals and statistical software, prevent many dentists from conducting high-quality research.
“High publication fees, coupled with restricted access to prestigious journals and statistical software, prevent many dentists from conducting high-quality research (21).”
From Research Publication Challenges Faced by Dentists in India: A Narrative Review of Multilevel Barriers (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
The Discussion (page unavailable) says publication fees matter to the medical and dental researchers surveyed and that external funding can keep charges from deterring publication. It does not report that dentists lack access to prestigious journals or statistical software, or that these barriers prevent them from conducting high-quality research; its findings concern journal selection and publishing. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 22 · Cited by 28
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1]Nagesh L Handbook on journal club and critical evaluation of scientific article: for students and teachers of health care sciences 2nd ed Swapra Jyothi publications Bengaluru 2011
- [3]Smith R The trouble with medical journals J R Soc Med 2006 99 3 115 119 16508048 PMC1383755
- [4]Burt BA Eklund SA Reading the Dental Literature Dentistry, dental practice, and the community 6th ed St. Louis Elsevier Saunders 2005 154 161
- [5]Shokraneh F Ilghami R Masoomi R Amanollahi A How to select a journal to submit and publish your biomedical paper? Bioimpacts 2012 2 1 61 68 23678443 PMC3648921
- [6]Lee KP Schotland M Bacchetti P Bero LA Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles JAMA 2002 287 2805 2808 12038918
- [7]Babor TF Morisano D Stenius K Winstanley EL O’Rielly J Publishing addiction Science: A guide for the perplexed How to choose a journal: scientific and practical considerations 2nd ed 2008 12 36 Available from: http://www.parint.org/isajewebsite/bookimages/isaje_2nd_edition_chapter2.pdf
- [8]Rousseau R Journal evaluation: technical and practical issues Library Trends 2002 50 3 418 439
- [9]Thompson PJ How to choose the right journal for your manuscript Chest 2007 132 1073 1076 17873202
- [13]Rawat S Meena S Publish or perish: Where are we heading? J Res Med Sci 2014 19 2 87 89 24778659 PMC3999612
- [14]Knight LV Steinbach TA Selecting an appropriate publication outlet: A comprehensive model of journal selection criteria for researchers in a broad range of academic disciplines International Journal of Doctoral Studies 2008 3 59 79
- [15]Harper FD Writing research reports and scholarly manuscripts for journal publication: Pitfalls and promises The Journal of Negro Education 2006 75 3 322 340
- [18]Warlick SE Vaughan KTL Factors influencing publication choice: why faculty choose open access Biomedical Digital Libraries 2007 4 1 Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-4-1 17349038 PMC1832213 · DOI
- [19]Jones AW The impact of alcohol and alcoholism among substance abuse journals Alcohol Alcohol 1999 34 25 34 10075398
- [20]Bergstrom CT West JD Wiseman MA The Eigenfactor metrics J Neurosci 2008 28 45 11433 11434 18987179 PMC6671297
- [21]Frank E Authors’ criteria for selecting journals JAMA 1994 272 2 163 164 8015134
- [23]Gasparyan AY Choosing the target journal: do authors need a comprehensive approach? J Korean Med Sci 2013 28 1117 1119 23960434 PMC3744695
- Authors
- Sandesh, N., & Wahrekar, S.
- ORCID
- Sandesh, Nagarajappa
- Venue
- Medicine and Pharmacy Reports
- Publisher
- Clujul Medical
- Published
- 2017-04-26
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 196-202
- ISSN
- 2602-0807 (ISSN-L)
- 2668-0572
- PMC
- PMC5433573
- OpenAlex
- W2562171540
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 17.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Medicine and Pharmacy Reports (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Keywords
- journal selection, scholarly publishing, publish or perish, impact factor, journal indexing, peer review, article processing charges, online submission, open access, medical researchers, researcher perceptions, India
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
