{"title":"Unsolicited Emails and Spam: An Unsustainable Burden for Academics","authors":"Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva","doi":"10.1111/jep.70057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Academics, including researchers and scholars, might receive undesired/unsolicited emails, including spam. This volume might differ depending on whether they use a web-based or institutional email, since filters for each may differ. In the author's experience, most unsolicited emails have mainly been related to publishing, such as requests for submissions to lesser-known or academically suspect journals, and have become the norm. In addition, in the COVID-19 pandemic era (2020–2023), unsolicited emails related to the virus or the pandemic were received, as were some emails related to the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2022–2024. To gain an appreciation of the daily and monthly volumes of emails received by the author in 2018–2024, emails were stored in email folders over these 7 years on a monthly basis. A total of 130,941 unsolicited emails (<i>sensu lato</i>) were received in this 7-year period (14,514; 17,438; 15,668; 20,458; 19,845; 21,321; 21,697 in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, respectively). The volume per month for each of these 7 years was 1613, 1938, 1741, 2273, 2205, 2369, and 2411 while the daily volume was 54, 64, 58, 75, 73, 79, and 80, respectively. Practical solutions are needed for academics to manage such unsustainable volumes of unsolicited emails. This brief assessment has limitations.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70057","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Academics, including researchers and scholars, might receive undesired/unsolicited emails, including spam. This volume might differ depending on whether they use a web-based or institutional email, since filters for each may differ. In the author's experience, most unsolicited emails have mainly been related to publishing, such as requests for submissions to lesser-known or academically suspect journals, and have become the norm. In addition, in the COVID-19 pandemic era (2020–2023), unsolicited emails related to the virus or the pandemic were received, as were some emails related to the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2022–2024. To gain an appreciation of the daily and monthly volumes of emails received by the author in 2018–2024, emails were stored in email folders over these 7 years on a monthly basis. A total of 130,941 unsolicited emails (sensu lato) were received in this 7-year period (14,514; 17,438; 15,668; 20,458; 19,845; 21,321; 21,697 in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, respectively). The volume per month for each of these 7 years was 1613, 1938, 1741, 2273, 2205, 2369, and 2411 while the daily volume was 54, 64, 58, 75, 73, 79, and 80, respectively. Practical solutions are needed for academics to manage such unsustainable volumes of unsolicited emails. This brief assessment has limitations.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.