<h1>Writing A Literature Review</h1>

Writing A Literature Review In principle the corresponding authors of every paper have been notified and invited to hitch the dialogue of their work , though no-one has shown up yet. In some instances the invitation could not have reached the authors, because of their choice of Gmail e-addresses, which are no longer accessible in mainland China. If not, simply ask them in the event that they have been practicing 翻墙 while accessing Gmail. During a recent scientific go to to China I discovered that every one severe Chinese scientists know tips on how to entry Google from inside China. You wrote “they've friends or members exterior the mainland, permitting them to access the bogus Gmail accounts and communicate with the journal” however I don’t assume they need that. Hong Kong and Taiwan present good web bridges for homegrown vpn’s. I suppose that the Chinese business world is identical because the Chinese educational world. The journal in question, “Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology”, is pay-to-publish Open Access, and does not seem to hassle with peer reviewers. A paradigm shift is required to rebuild belief and reproducibility in science. A stringent high quality control at the public indexing of scientific literature and the establishing of an impartial worldwide anti-research misconduct agency might be part of the answer. Contact NIH and the US National Library of Medicine and ask for high quality management of their journal indexing. Ask your research institution why they assist publishers that are spreading misinformation and destroying the science. If a nation tolerates and in lots of cases actively promotes fakery for everything from information to reagents, why should I waste my precious time considering or acknowledging the outputs of its researchers? They are shoveling shit whereas I am making an attempt to mine gold. Crap researchers pay crap journals to publish crap, and within the process they make a mockery of peer review, citations and the concept of scientific publication normally. Screening by originating nations really works fairly properly, and if the minority of respectable contributors undergo, that is the value they have to pay for letting the problem continue. It is to be hoped that we'll soon have AI methods able to doing the job of quarantining these half-brilliant wankers in their own nook of what they think about is the scientific universe. Maybe we are able to even assemble some virtual reality schemes to idiot them into pondering they are doing one thing worthwhile. If you could have been “critical” enough speaking with your “severe” Chinese scientist friends, you would have recognized what 翻墙 means. Neither enterprise, nor science, is stopped by internet walls; although everybody complains what a nuisance it's. has turn into popular among China-primarily based molecular-biology researchers as an outlet for his or her work, and has a decent Citations Index of 3.448 . Despite this, my initial hope that the editors would consult consultants to evaluate submissions has been dispelled by their blithe acceptance of the egregious images above. Perhaps the peer-reviewers and contributors are collectively engaged in a Post-Modern project of redefining what Western Blots and FACS plots ought to appear to be, forging new expectations and conventions. Its prospects are Chinese docs determined for promotion. Apparently even journal editors are part of the scam, publishing fraudulent made-up science. Check out the latest suggestions from our customers to dispel any worries about our service. Let the exceptional outcomes of our work communicate for themselves. Judging by signature made-up gel and flow cytometry knowledge, all stemming from the identical paper mill. The Communist Party of China is merely getting what it ordered, many times. An investigation by Elisabeth Bik, Smut Clyde, Morty and Tiger BB8 reveals the workings of a paper mill. If you dislike your paper or suppose we fail to satisfy the provided instructions, ask us at no cost revisions within two weeks after the delivery date. Any personal or billing data you share with us is completely confidential. But Jilin University appears to have turn out to be significantly depending on this papermill for workers promotions. If Bin then don't read, or if have time/inclination/abilities or need entertainment, Read and contribute to Pubpeer discussion. But the editors of Artificial Cells settle for the papermill’s explanations, and I am positive they don't seem to be motivated totally by the prospect of Article Processing Charges. After publication the authors seen vital errors in their results, and in agreement with the editors at International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, withdrew the article. The authors revised the study to address the errors and submitted to Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine and Biotechnology, where the article was totally peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the editors. In the interests of offering our readers with full transparency on this problem we now have provided the hyperlink to the withdrawal assertion”. The papermill simply despatched it to Artificial Cells Nanomedicine and Biotechnology as an alternative. Two cases up to now have shown up in “BMC Cancer”, which does have peer review, and sometimes even makes out there the reviewers’ reviews.