These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence based through credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased, and does not use emotional words. These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer-reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.
- Overall, we rate Advances in Respiratory Medicine Pro-Science and Mostly Factual for reporting due to being published by a company that has failed fact checks in other journals.
Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: EXCELLENT
Media Type: Journal
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
Advances in Respiratory Medicine is published by MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute), formerly Molecular Diversity Preservation International, an open-access journal publisher based in Basel, Switzerland. The journal reports on respiratory medicine, covering allergology, oncology, immunology, and infectious diseases of the respiratory system, published Bi-Monthly. MDPI publishes over 400 journals.
Funded by / Ownership
The publisher of Advances in Respiratory Medicine is MDPI AG, which Shu-Kun Lin owns. Here is the list of the Management Team. According to “MDPI Open Access Information and Policy.” MDPI articles and all its journals are open access where authors pay a one-time Article Processing Charge (APC) to cover the costs of peer review administration and management; here is “General Information on MDPI’s Article Processing Charges (APC).”
Analysis / Bias
Advances in Respiratory Medicine cover allergology, oncology, immunology, and infectious diseases of the respiratory system. Studies are published via open access, such as this Nasal Nitric Oxide Levels: Improving the Diagnosis of Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia in Puerto Rico. Like all others reviewed, this study is Pro-Science, well-researched, and low-biased.
While Advances in Respiratory Medicine has not failed a fact-check, its publisher has faced criticism as an open-access predatory journal. Read our full review on MDPI.
Failed Fact Checks
- None for Advances in Respiratory Medicine; however, other MDPI journals have failed fact checks.
Overall, we rate Advances in Respiratory Medicine Pro-Science and Mostly Factual for reporting due to being published by a company that has failed fact checks in other journals. (M. Huitsing 10/21/2022)
Last Updated on May 14, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.