Cureus

• 1. Founding And Evolution

  ›

  John R. Adler and Alexander Muacevic launched PeerEMed in 2009 as a web-based medical journal. The pair brought Stanford University and the University of Munich to the table for leadership roles. They changed the name to Cureus in December 2012 to reflect their new direction. This rebranding marked a shift from a smaller project to a broader open access platform. By late 2022, Springer Nature acquired the journal, integrating it into a larger group of publications. The transition signaled a move toward stability but also drew scrutiny over its rapid growth.

• 2. Publication Mechanics

  ›

  Cureus requires mandatory pre-publication peer review before any article appears online. Experts must evaluate submissions within days rather than months. After publication, anyone can submit an optional review through the Scholarly Impact Quotient system. Expert reviews receive higher scores than general public comments. Librarians and scientists worry this SIQ metric could be manipulated by authors seeking high visibility. The journal does not charge fees if certain criteria are met. Speed remains a core selling point despite criticism about quality control measures.

• 3. Indexing Controversies

  ›

  The journal appeared in the Emerging Sources Citation Index for several years. In October 2025, Clarivate removed Cureus from the Web of Science database. This decision meant the journal lost its impact factor status. It remained indexed in PubMed Central, EBSCO, CNKI, Dimensions, and Google Scholar. Retraction Watch reported that the removal reflected concerns over the journal's reputation. The fluctuating status created uncertainty among researchers who relied on traditional indexing services for credibility.

• 4. Ethical Scandals

  ›

  Peter A. McCullough published a paper on COVID-19 vaccinations in 2024 before it was retracted. He is known as an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist according to Retraction Watch. Another incident involved republishing a previously withdrawn study in June 2022. That original paper had been pulled from Frontiers in Medicine due to methodological flaws. Concerns included potential violations of medical ethics regarding a Brazil-based trial. By January 2024, fifty-six papers were retracted within a single month. These events highlighted recurring issues with editorial oversight and content integrity.

• 5. The Wall Of Shame

  ›

  Cureus displayed a public list called the Wall of Shame in April 2022. The feature targeted authors who committed egregious ethical violations. Institutions that enabled such behavior were also named on the page. Critics argued the list placed undue emphasis on corresponding authors specifically. The journal removed the feature in May 2023 following backlash. Around the same time, notes of concern appeared for nearly fifty papers without author knowledge. Disputed authorship became a central theme during this turbulent period.

• 6. Academic Channel Closures

  ›

  Six academic channels shut down in November 2024 after allegations surfaced. Sources linked these channels to research paper mills operating outside normal review processes. Cureus maintained it retained editorial control over all submissions despite the closures. The decision followed months of scrutiny over how certain channels operated. Retraction Watch noted the pattern as part of broader concerns about predatory publishing practices. The closures marked a significant shift in how the journal managed its expanding network of specialized sections.