Is dovepress.com Safe?

Trusted by WOT

Website security score

54%
WOT’s security score is based on our unique technology and community expert reviews.
Is this website claimed?
No
Community reviews
★ 3.2
WOT’s algorithm
64%
Child Safety
N/A

What does the community say?

Leave a review

How would you rate this website from 1 to 5?
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
Share your feedback and help the communityReviews must consist of at least 15 charactersChoose the tags that best describe this website
Malware or Viruses
Poor customer service
Phishing
Scam
Potentially illegal
Misleading or unethical
Privacy Risk
Suspicious
Hate, discrimination
Spam
Potential unwanted program
Ads / Pop-ups
Adult Content
Incidental nudity
Gruesome or shocking
Cancel
Post Review
3.2
starstarstarempty-starempty-star

Based on 2 reviews

Sort by:
Newest
Dovepress is a low-grade, low-quality source of multiple medical journals. Though they claim to be "peer-reviewed," they openly allow studies to be published for products that have been sponsored by the manufacturers of those products. According to Yale, "Studies sponsored by industry were 3.6 times more likely to have conclusions favorable to industry than studies without that support." [2] Dovepress contributes to the scientific industry's "Replication Crisis," a dangerous and human-harmful result of studies performed in unprofessional manners [1], such as by hosting papers written by corrupt authors sponsored to give good results by manufacturers. You can see one example of Dovepress publishing a corrupt study sponsored by the manufacturer here: [3] Based on the evidence, Dovepress is not a quality source of scientific data, and its publishings should be scrutinized for the elements of unprofessionalism, such as corrupt funding, present in its content, that make it clear that actual scientific results are not strived for. 2 out of 5. [1]Google "percent studies cannot be reproduced" (WOT mistakenly refuses to allow direct links to necessary sources) [2]Google "Does industry funding equal conflict of interest? Often it does, Yale authors claim" (WOT mistakenly refuses to allow direct links to necessary sources) [3] Google "NIH Clinical effects of an oral supplement rich in antioxidants on skin radiance in women" (WOT mistakenly refuses to allow direct links to necessary sources)
Helpful
Website belongs to an academic publisher; reliable.
Helpful
Check If You’ve Been CompromisedConnect with Google to scan your browsing history.
Connect with Google
As seen on
By signing in, you agree to data collection and use as described in our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy
alternative-placeholder

About WOT

We reviewed more than 2 Million website and counting. WOT is a lightweight extension designed to help you browse quickly and securely. It will clean your browser, speed it up, and protect your private information.

Is this your website?

Claim your website to access WOT’s business tools and connect with your customers.
Claim This Website
This site uses cookies for analytics and personalization. By continuing, you agree to our cookie policy.
Accept