‘Publish or Perish!’: perception and self-appraisal of Indian physicians on academic publications: A cross-sectional study
Main Article Content
Keywords
Academic publications, research paper, researcher, publish or perish.
Abstract
Background: Research and academic publications are crucial for Indian physicians' professional growth, evidence generation, and academic advancement. It often contributes to the "publish or perish" culture. This study aims to assess Indian physicians' perceptions and self-appraisal on academic publications, for those practicing evidence-based medicine (EBM).
Methodology: A cross-sectional online survey with proper consent was conducted over two months, targeting Indian physicians practicing EBM to evaluate their views on research and publications.
Results: A total of 320 physicians participated (mean age 41.15 ± 8.94 years; 68.8% male). Most held post-graduate degrees (73.4%) and worked in government-run institutions (56.6%). A large proportion (88.7%) had prior publications, with a preference for PubMed/Medline-indexed journals (40.0%). Sixty-five percent balanced clinical and academic roles. Physicians were motivated by career advancement (31.6%) and professional recognition (34.7%). Behavioral patterns showed "addiction-like" tendencies, with many frequently checking publication metrics and tracking manuscript progress. Physicians with post-graduate qualifications, particularly in medicine, were more engaged in these behaviors. Those in central government teaching institutions showed even greater engagement.
Conclusion: This study reveals the complex dynamics of academic publishing among Indian physicians, highlighting the pressures of the "publish or perish" culture. Institutions should focus on fostering quality over quantity in publishing, providing mentorship, and promoting ethical practices to mitigate these pressures.
References
2. Peh WC, Ng KH. Basic structure and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008 Jul;49(7):522–5.
3. Burns PB, Rohrich RJ, Chung KC. The levels of evidence and their role in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jul;128(1):305–10.
4. Finlay AY. Publishing addiction: a behavioural disorder with specific characteristics. Br J Dermatol. 2021 Feb;184(2):338–9.
5. Parmar A. Panic publishing: An unwarranted consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Res. 2020 Dec;294:113525.
6. Abritis A, Marcus A, Oransky I. An “alarming” and “exceptionally high” rate of COVID-19 retractions? Account Res. 2021 Jan;28(1):58–9.
7. Aliukonis V, Poškutė M, Gefenas E. Perish or Publish Dilemma: Challenges to Responsible Authorship. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020 Mar 12;56(3):123.
8. Ray S, Shah I, Nundy S. The research output from Indian medical institutions between 2005 and 2014. Current Medicine Research and Practice. 2016 Mar 1;6(2):49–58.
9. Mondal H, Mondal S, Behera JK. Roller coaster of publication criteria: What is new in teachers’ eligibility qualifications in medical institutions regulations, 2022? Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022 May;70(5):1845–6.
10. Dixon AK. Publishing and academic promotion. Singapore Med J. 2009 Sep;50(9):847–50.
11. Happe LE. Distinguishing Predatory from Reputable Publishing Practices. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020 Aug;26(8):956–60.
12. Pyne D. The Rewards of Predatory Publications at a Small Business School [Internet]. Rochester, NY; 2017 [cited 2024 Aug 25]. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2931624
13. Shen C, Björk BC. “Predatory” open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Med. 2015 Oct 1;13:230.
14. Camp M, Escott BG. Authorship proliferation in the orthopaedic literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Apr 3;95(7):e44.
15. Rahman L, Muirhead-Allwood SK. How many orthopedic surgeons does it take to write a research article? 50 years of authorship proliferation in and internationalization of the orthopedic surgery literature. Orthopedics. 2010 Jul 13;33(7):478.
16. Latha T, Sharma SK, Patidar V, Gaur R, Nath S, Mudgal SK. Perception of nurse academicians on academic publications: A cross-sectional study. Niger Med J. 2025 16;66(2):681-691.
17. Luksanapruksa P, Millhouse PW. Authorship Considerations: What Qualifies? Clin Spine Surg. 2016 Mar;29(2):60–1.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike License 4.0. This licence allows users to download and share, remix, tweak and build upon the article for non-commercial purposes, so long as the original authorship is acknowledged and the new creations are licensed under identical terms.