LAUSR

In academia, publications, often referred to as “academic currency”, are important for professional growth and academic promotion. Medical journals serve as the platform for medical publications, with an increase in specialized journals mirroring the shift toward oncology sub-specialization to capture the nuances of subspecialized care in today’s era of rapid scientific advances. This increase in oncological journals and subsequent higher number of publications is a doubleedged sword, posing certain drawbacks. This “Publication Inflation” can be defined as an increased number of publications that carry less value to the readers, researchers and to the oncology community. While inflation is a debatable economic term that may be good or bad, it is our opinion that this inflation in publications will likely result in negative consequences. The inflation in medical publications generally, and oncology publications specifically, results in a vicious cycle of “publish or perish” that will continue to worsen if not addressed promptly. While some acknowledge the merit of a “highquality” publication that can further the scientific growth in a certain field, many resort to and promote the culture of “more is better”, as reflected by the academic standards of hiring and promotion. The high number of publications and journals will result in a lower number and quality of reads. As an example, even for a relatively rare cancer such as multiple myeloma, there were more than 3000 PubMed indexed publications in 2020. This translates into an average of almost 8-9 publications daily. While some may argue that not all those publications reflect original investigation and/or important clinical observations, there are certainly too many papers that are published and not adequately read by the oncology community. If we think of oncology from a broader perspective, it will be even harder to keep up with the flooding wave of publications that are out on a daily basis. Furthermore, how can the community general oncologist filter through this flood of publications in the multiple disciplines of oncology care that he/she provides? Publishing is a taxing process. There are increased numbers of open access journals that charge fees to allow for online publication. This will add a financial expense to a long process that includes patient enrollment, follow up, data collection, analysis, and/or writing. While open access journals may seem an option that clinicians/researchers can either choose or not, with the high number of yearly publications and submissions, open access journals may be the only option for some. The “prominent” subspecialty researchers, often referred to as the “big names in the field”, publish a lot of articles. This can shape the metrics of academic success toward quantity, in the minds of trainees and junior faculty, resulting in increased numbers of submissions and subsequent publications. With the higher need of a “space” to publish and the increased number of journal reviewers,