Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Tom

Jeff, thanks. I browsed through OMICS cardiology journal and found an astonishing number of well-respected people on the ed board, as well as a few articles by established groups. My take is they were either naive or that is where they started sending some of their crap data, while the youngsters can enjoy the “glamour” of being on a board which they would not have done in serious journals.
My question is, have you been able to scrutinize the peer-review process in depth, i.e. hard facts and figures relating to acceptance rates, processing times etc. This would underbuild your and my assumption of negligible peer-review. Thanks.