PRO-SCIENCE
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 the Molecular Cytogenetics Journal as a Pro-Science open-source journal. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: United Kingdom
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
The Molecular Cytogenetics Journal is a peer-reviewed open-access journal published by BioMed Central (BMC) covering research on molecular cytogenetics. According to its about page, “Molecular Cytogenetics encompasses all aspects of chromosome biology and the application of molecular cytogenetic techniques in all areas of biology and medicine, including structural and functional organization of the chromosome and nucleus, genome variation, expression and evolution, chromosome abnormalities and genomic variations in medical genetics and tumor genetics. “
Founded in 2000, BioMed Central, or BMC, is a United Kingdom-based, for-profit scientific open-access publisher. They publish more than 300 journals that are entirely online. According to their about page, “Our leading research journals include selective titles such as BMC Biology, BMC Medicine, Genome Biology and Molecular Cytogenetics Journal, academic journals such as Journal of Hematology & Oncology, Molecular Cytogenetics Journal, and Microbiome, and the BMC series, 65 inclusive journals focused on the needs of individual research communities. We also partner with leading institutions and societies to publish journals on their behalf.”
Read our profile on the UK government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
BioMed Central is owned by Springer Nature, an academic publishing company created by the May 2015 merger of Springer Science+Business Media and Holtzbrinck Publishing Group’s Nature Publishing Group, Palgrave Macmillan, and Macmillan Education. The company reported revenues of over 1 billion USD.
Analysis / Bias
Molecular Cytogenetics Journal is an open-access journal that publishes information and research related to molecular research on cytogenetics. The journal primarily publishes research like this: Contribution of genetic variants to congenital heart defects in both singleton and twin fetuses: a Chinese cohort study.
BioMed Central (BMC) is an open-access publisher of scientific journals. There are two types of Open Access Journals, legitimate and predatory, both of which charge the author for publication. Predatory journals often lack peer review and are generally considered not credible. BioMed Central is considered a legitimate, open-access publisher that is frequently indexed in PubMed. However, BMC journals have been criticized for retracting numerous studies due to fake peer reviews or poor methodology.
Although BMC has retracted some studies in other publications that were found to be of poor methodology and not thoroughly peer-reviewed, the Molecular Cytogenetics Journal publishes credible scientific studies that are factual and appropriately peer-reviewed.
Failed Fact Checks
- None by the Molecular Cytogenetics Journal; however, BioMed Central has.
Overall, we rate the Molecular Cytogenetics Journal as a Pro-Science open-source journal. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record. (D. Van Zandt 02/08/2024)
Source: https://molecularcytogenetics.biomedcentral.com/
Last Updated on February 8, 2024 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
or
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources