Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit.

+964770 085 0035
Office: SAT - MON 9:00 AM TO 3:30 PM
Join KScien

EVIDENCE PROVING THAT (ADVANCED JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE) BELONGING TO (TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCE) IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL.

19-Jun-2018
News

After being bombarded by spam emails soliciting manuscript submission by (Advanced Journal of Emergency Medicine), researchers from Kscien organization commenced an investigation regarding scientific nature of the journal, initiating from website examination. Problems including plagiarism, typo and grammar errors and unscientific claims raised suspicion and made us step toward more solid and objective proof. In a sting operation, we submitted three flaw manuscripts with super major problems. Without any hesitation and within three days, we were surprised by acceptance letters from the journal for all three manuscripts. Two days later, they were released on the journal’s website. After distributing the news in the social media about one of the manuscript, the journal editors eliminated the paper from their website but fortunately we had recorded the details, here is some clarification about one of the accepted and published papers, the one which was wiped out from the website. Other two sham papers are still present at their website and will remain concealed.

Here is the fault manuscript.

In this pseudoscientific research, which comprised of 3 papers, there are 32 fatal mistakes, each by itself is sufficient to cause desk rejection of the manuscript, but unfortunately because there was not any kind of scientific filter, the manuscript escaped into the website!

The errors in this draft were categorized into two levels, one to be perceived by editorial and staff review, others to be discerned by peer review process. None was detected! in this short essay, we can not highlight all the mistakes, instead, we are going to address examples of each group of errors.

  Group I (evidence of absence of editorial and staff review.

    1-In the case report section, the patient’s breathing is normal, SPO2 = 96% while the same person in the discussion section is about to die from dyspnea, SPO2 69%!

2-At the outset of the discussion, the authors narrates a story of operation of subclvaian artery aneurysm, stating that the first failed surgery was tried at 1918,  the triumphant operation was performed 12 decades later! 12 decades plus 1918?!

Group II (evidence of absence of peer review process)

1- (Figure 1) is a CT-scan of a patient with mesothelioma, while it is claimed to be normal in the legend.

2- (Figure 2) is a bronchograph while it is titled as a bronchoscopy.

3- (Figure 3) is a coronary angiography while it is highlighted as a subclvian angiography.

4- (Figure 4) is an intraoperative picture of neck operation, illustrated as a thoracotomy!