Dear Faiez N. Hattab ,

Since the subject is somewhat out of my field of expertise, I cannot judge its scientific relevance, however looking at the journal and number of citations these papers obtained they apparently do meet scientific standards and seems to have some relevance in the eyes of the scientific community since:

-The first mentioned paper is published in the journal “Phytomedicine”, this is a well-respected journal with a decent impact factor (4.268) and CiteScore (5.7) and is a PubMed journal as well (https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/phytomedicine/about/abstracting-and-indexing )

-The first paper is cited reasonably well (cited by 50 according to Google Scholar).

-The second mentioned paper is published in the journal “European Journal of Oral Sciences”, this is a nice and legit journal with an impact factor of 2.22 (and CiteScore 3.3) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/16000722?tabActivePane= )

-The paper is cited quite good (cited by 129 according to Google Scholar)

So yes, one can argue about the scientific relevance. In terms of quality and looking at the legitimacy of the journals these are decent papers and in this case certainly not two examples of ‘business-oriented predatory journals’.

Best regards.

An article does not has a poor scientific value !!!

May be for a person who don't has a particular interest in it research field: An article always provide a scientific value to somebody somewhere

For your information, Meswak is a natural tooth brush obtained from Salvadora persica plant [Hattab FN. Meswak: the natural toothbrush. J Clin Dent 1997; 8:125-129]. Can you elaborate what scientific value you gained from the effect of tooth brush on fertility!!!!

Seriously speaking -- as per my consideration, most of the articles published are with POOR or NO scientific value to the Society, in true sense!

These are published with an intention to get promotion, to get degree, to get allotment for projects, to get salary, to earn money, to earn fame ... and so on, but not due to any intention to do something for betterment of the society.

Thanks.

You are right! They publish their weak articles in business-orientated predatory journals.

Dear Faiez N. Hattab ,

Since the subject is somewhat out of my field of expertise, I cannot judge its scientific relevance, however looking at the journal and number of citations these papers obtained they apparently do meet scientific standards and seems to have some relevance in the eyes of the scientific community since:

-The first mentioned paper is published in the journal “Phytomedicine”, this is a well-respected journal with a decent impact factor (4.268) and CiteScore (5.7) and is a PubMed journal as well (https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/phytomedicine/about/abstracting-and-indexing )

-The first paper is cited reasonably well (cited by 50 according to Google Scholar).

-The second mentioned paper is published in the journal “European Journal of Oral Sciences”, this is a nice and legit journal with an impact factor of 2.22 (and CiteScore 3.3) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/16000722?tabActivePane= )

-The paper is cited quite good (cited by 129 according to Google Scholar)

So yes, one can argue about the scientific relevance. In terms of quality and looking at the legitimacy of the journals these are decent papers and in this case certainly not two examples of ‘business-oriented predatory journals’.

Best regards.