Evaluating JMIR Publications vis-a-vis Beall criteria

(Result: JMIR is not meeting a single criterion of a predatory publisher)

Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers

By Jeffrey Beall

2nd edition / December 1, 2012


Note: Beall does not consistently phrase his questions in a way so that either “Yes” or “No” identifies a predatory publisher. We marked answers that represents best practices according to OASPA, STM, ICMJE, COPE etc with (+), while (-) would indicate predatory practices (not encountered when evaluating JMIR Publications)

Evaluation Date: Nov 2016

1. Complete an analysis of the publisher’s content, practices, and websites according to ethical standards established by membership organizations.

A. Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) Code of Conduct

Result: Yes (+): JMIR adheres to or exceeds all the OASPA criteria. JMIR is in fact a founding member of OASPA and is a member in good standing.

B. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers [PDF]

Result: Yes (+): JMIR adheres to or exceeds all COPE criteria. The Journal of Medical Internet Research is a COPE member and all JMIR journals follow the COPE best practices and flowcharts

C. International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) Code of Conduct

Result: Yes (+): JMIR adheres to or exceeds all STM criteria. JMIR Publications is a member of STM.

2. Complete an analysis of the publisher’s content, practices, and websites: contact the publisher if necessary, read statements from the publisher’s authors about their experiences with the publisher, and determine whether the publisher commits any of the following practices (below) that are known to be committed by predatory publishers.

Result: As detailed below, JMIR Publications does not “commit” and of the practices listed below. Regarding “statements from publisher’s authors about their experiences”, reviews on the academic journal review website scirev https://scirev.sc/reviews/journal-of-medical-internet-research/ show extremely positive ratings and testimonies from authors. The average rating is “excellent” and exceeds Plos One or other journals.

Editor and Staff

Business Management

The publisher…



A predatory publisher may ...

The following practices are considered to be reflective of poor journal standards and, while they do not equal predatory criteria, potential authors should give due consideration to these items prior to manuscript submissions: