As a recent victim of a predatory conference, I can attest to the humiliation of such an experience. The email I received indicated that my recently published article had led them to request that I be a main presenter at their upcoming conference. The email was flattering, and I promptly asked one of my colleagues if she would co-present with me. Had it not been for the two of us seeing some red flags, the outcome may have been much worse.
The email invitation indicated I had already been accepted for an oral presentation for the international conference to be held in Italy, even though I hadn’t submitted an abstract. Impressed by the conference title, I went to the website and found it to be well done and thorough. There was an outline of the scientific program, much like many of the ones I have attended. The organizing faculty were from various locations throughout the world, and there were headshots and biographies for each. Details about the purpose of the conference, target audience, registration information, and call for abstracts were also included. There were even options for exhibitors and conference sponsors to participate.
When I initially responded to the email, I asked if I should formally submit an abstract, knowing this was typical of conference presenters. The response was that I should use the template on the website, which was similar to those I have used for other abstract submissions. The email also indicated that to present, I would need to register for the conference by the deadline in 48 hours. My co-presenter and I provided high-resolution professional photos, biographies, and a full abstract of our work. We received a congratulatory email of acceptance in under 24 hours, which stated, “We glad to inform you that your abstract has been accepted for the oral presentation.” (Note the missing “are” before “glad.”)
We quickly went online to pay for our registration fees, which listed several payment tiers, including early-bird registration discounts. There was also an option to make hotel accommodations in the same link. One thing that stood out was no fee waiver or discount for presenters. We thought perhaps that this wasn’t unusual for an international conference.
The first red flag was raised when the initial attempt to submit credit card information for payment failed. Determined to make it work, assuming I had made an error, I tried two more times without success. In hindsight, I’m aware of how foolish I was. I decided to write an email to the conference contact indicating that I couldn’t get the payment link to work. I also contacted my colleague, who said her attempts to submit payment didn’t work either. I promptly received an email response with a link to pay via PayPal, which didn’t require that I have a PayPal account. Red flag number two.
At this point, my colleague decided to look more closely at the conference faculty. She searched LinkedIn and found that the main presenter was deceased. The photo on the conference website was from an online post of her passing. I then looked up some of the other presenters, only to find their place of work and titles listed didn’t match what was on the conference site. I messaged two of them on LinkedIn to see if they were presenting at an upcoming conference in Italy. One didn’t respond; the other said he wasn’t presenting at any such conference and didn’t know that he was listed as a presenter. He thanked me and said he would request that his information be removed from the website.
Next, I called the contact person listed in the invitation email at the number provided. The number came up as being in the United Kingdom. There was no answer or voicemail message, so I called the phone number listed on the website. It also was a United Kingdom number and again, the phone rang numerous times with no answer.
I checked LinkedIn for someone with the name listed in the email as the primary contact. Interestingly, there was only one such person with this name. There was a picture, his name, and credentials listed as “Expert in sales and business development I Pharmaceutical and Hospital Industries.” The grammatical error or typo (“I”) now stood out. There was nothing more: no work experience, no background, no college degrees, no connections to other colleagues. His contact information was simply a link to his LinkedIn profile.
Next, I searched the conference website to contact someone where the conference was to take place. Notably, there was no direct link to the hotel on the website. Another red flag. I was able to search for the address and phone number online. After two days of attempting to get through to the hotel event coordinator, complicated by the weekend and time differences, I reached her. She confirmed that no such conference was scheduled.
Meanwhile, I received an email that read “We inform you that your profile has been updated in our conference page please visit through this link…” The poor grammar and lack of a period between sentences was glaring. What I had considered a possible language translation error in previous communications, began to cause suspicion. My image and biography now appeared as one of the faculty on the conference website.
At this point I felt I needed to explore the topic further and do something to inform others. As I continued to search for information on predatory conferences, I found many resources and articles on the topic and was appalled I hadn’t been aware of such a thing.
On the advice of a colleague, I wrote to the conference via email and informed them I was withdrawing my submission and wouldn’t be attending the conference. I also instructed them to remove my name, photo, and information from the website within 48 hours. I didn’t receive an email response to my request. I did, however, look at the website again, on the date of the deadline I had provided, and my picture and biography were removed. The information for the man I had contacted through LinkedIn also had been removed, and a few new presenters appeared in our place.
Many resources exist to help nurses identify predatory conferences. Once such tool is the Conference Evaluation Tool included in the American Nurse Journal article “Predatory conferences.” I have since completed the evaluation tool and found that of the 13 items listed, I answered yes to three and no to eight, with two I couldn’t answer. Based on the criteria, “If there are more entries in the ‘No’ column, it is likely that the conference in question is predatory,” my suspicions were confirmed.
My experience illustrates how easy it is to fall into the trap of a predatory conference and the importance of educating yourself and others on this topic. Be wary of enticing emails that promise too much. Read the article to learn more about this deceptive practice.
