Is Neurology World Conference (NWC 2023) a legitimate/non-predatory conference?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

docren004

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
59
Reaction score
17
I just got invited to speak at Neurology World Conference (NWC 2023) (website: www.neurologyworldconference.com/) by Precision Global Conferences and offered a 50% discount to register. After scanning the website, I'm not completely sure what this is. You know what that means. It's time to play another round of "Is it a legitimate professional conference, speaking at which will look impressive on the ol' ERAS residency app, or is it considered predatory, and will including it on ye olde app therefore look like I'm a sap who paid a scammer in a dark Internet alley for a participation trophy?"

To be clear, this is not the same thing as World Congress of Neurology (WCN) by the World Federation of Neurology, which I've already confirmed is considered legit.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I run Neurology Conference of the World. It's the Neurology World Conference that's a scam.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
But sir, I wouldn't want to speak at any conference that would have me as a speaker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
I usually assume that any conference that needs to send unsolicited invitations to a graduate/medical student (or anyone really) is sketch. I constantly get generic template emails that are some variation (usually with worse grammar and more ego stroking) of "Dr./Prof (lol) sErISaNo, We read your fantastic paper X in the very prestigious journal Y. We would love to have you speak at conference Z . We're offering discounted registration, free hotel, etc...". The conferences are always short, in a desirable city but ****ty hotel, small (yet somehow incredibly broad), and run/managed by some company that puts on dozens of these conferences per year, often in totally unrelated fields. They probably aren't fake or a scam exactly, but they are not really "real" either. They're put on because people will pay to pad their resumes.

You might be interested in this article. A journalist actually went to one of these conferences, interviewed some of the attendees and someone on the scientific committee, and wrote about the whole experience. Long story short, the conference was real and even had some big names involved. But, it was poorly run and organized and half the speakers bailed at the last minute.

So anyway, looking at the website, this conference really checks all the (bad) boxes. It probably isn't exactly "predatory" in the same way a journal might be (fake peer review, pay-to-publish, made-up editorial boards). Instead you'll get a phoned-in attempt at a conference that isn't associated with any society or institution. There might be a poster session, but everything is accepted. There may be good speakers, but who knows because, as you can see, they just spam invitations to anyone. I bet they advertise coffee breaks and some sort of certificate for talking/attending. You're better off presenting a talk or poster at your local society meeting or school research day/symposium. You'll save money and no-one will think you're trying to pull a fast one (even if it's still a bit of padding).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I usually assume that any conference that needs to send unsolicited invitations to a graduate/medical student (or anyone really) is sketch.
For real.

OP may as well have said: "hey guys, here's some obviously predatory behavior. Is the conference engaging in said predatory behavior a predatory conference?"

Invited speakers at real conferences are experts in their fields. Residency applicants are almost by definition not experts in their fields (with the very rare exception of the occasional *extremely* successful MD/PhD).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
For real.

OP may as well have said: "hey guys, here's some obviously predatory behavior. Is the conference engaging in said predatory behavior a predatory conference?"

Invited speakers at real conferences are experts in their fields. Residency applicants are almost by definition not experts in their fields (with the very rare exception of the occasional *extremely* successful MD/PhD).
I actually am arguably an expert in my little subfield (which is different and unrelated to my field as a medical trainee). Not sure if that changes the assessment.
 
They have a “chiropractic neurologist” labeled as a neurosurgeon on the page.

That’s all you really need to know, mang.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
They have a “chiropractic neurologist” labeled as a neurosurgeon on the page.

That’s all you really need to know, mang.
Why I oughta adjust your basal spinal chakra
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I actually am arguably an expert in my little subfield (which is different and unrelated to my field as a medical trainee). Not sure if that changes the assessment.

It doesn't change anything about this particular conference. The whole thing has the look and feel of a classic "predatory" conference. It's obvious if you've come across this before.

Look, if a big-name conference chooses to invite a speaker it means that that person is well known enough for an organizer (already probably an experienced researcher) to say "we have to have this guy/gal". This probably isn't going to happen until mid-career since it requires exposure. You probably should be honest with yourself here, unless you have a PhD and a decade of publications behind you already, I would treat any invitation as suspect (until proven otherwise).

Also, if you have to say that you are "arguably" an expert you probably are not, in fact, an expert (at least in the setting of an academic conference where there is a pretty high bar to being considered such).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It doesn't change anything about this particular conference. The whole thing has the look and feel of a classic "predatory" conference. It's obvious if you've come across this before.

Look, if a big-name conference chooses to invite a speaker it means that that person is well known enough for an organizer (already probably an experienced researcher) to say "we have to have this guy/gal". This probably isn't going to happen until mid-career since it requires exposure. You probably should be honest with yourself here, unless you have a PhD and a decade of publications behind you already, I would treat any invitation as suspect (until proven otherwise).

Also, if you have to say that you are "arguably" an expert you probably are not, in fact, an expert (at least in the setting of an academic conference where there is a pretty high bar to being considered such).
Point taken, and I appreciate the feedback.

I said “arguably” because I personally think the whole concept of expertise and experts is misleading and meaningless. I’ve talked to people in my field who are considered experts, and it seems subjectively to me like they know shockingly little. But that’s because our field is even more vast than most, possible knowledge is infinite, and we all know about and are interested in different things (it’s very different than medicine, where knowledge is standardized and uniform within fields and directly comparable between people using board scores). I am one of the leading experts in several of my areas of interest, as shown by a few signs, such as my half decades’ worth of publications, my H index being above average for a junior faculty member even though I am not one, the fact that I am a PI/PD, and peer reviewing by invitation articles in my areas of expertise for prestigious journals such as the BMJ, among other things.

I do treat every invitation as suspect until demonstrated to be otherwise, which has only happened a couple of times so far unequivocally. I agree this one appears “predatory.” I get hundreds of questionable invitations a year, so I am familiar. Asking a question and expressing reasonable doubt and nuance are not necessarily signs of ignorance. Often, they are actually signs of true skepticism/intellectual humility

The distinction between predatory and non-predatory conferences is, in most cases, completely subjective and a product of social proof and belief, not objective reality, in my humble opinion. So by asking this question, I am simply testing the perceptions and beliefs of clinicians in the field in order to double check my prediction about what putting this conference on my ERAS application would likely do for my application, since that is determined by popular perception among this subgroup, not reality or my opinion.

I appreciate the confirmation of what I already thought.
 
I’ve talked to people in my field who are considered experts, and it seems subjectively to me like they know shockingly little.
This is an interesting take.

Asking a question and expressing reasonable doubt and nuance are not necessarily signs of ignorance. Often, they are actually signs of true skepticism/intellectual humility
I'm not getting a lot of humility here.

The distinction between predatory and non-predatory conferences is, in most cases, completely subjective
This is not really true.

Look I obviously struck a nerve. I don't mean to be harsh, but that wall of text is a bit cringe. There's a lot to unpack but I'm not out here trying to attack you. I'm glad that you are finding success, but I would tone it back. This is the internet and it doesn't really matter but man, don't say this stuff out loud to anyone.
 
This is an interesting take.
Most people considered experts do seem very knowledgeable to me about something. I meant that some do not seem to know much of anything at all that is even remotely important in my field from my perspective.
I'm not getting a lot of humility here.
Intellectual humility is not the same thing as humility. You can google it. It means maintaining awareness of what you don’t know and uncertainty. It can be thought of as another term for skepticism (i.e., actual philosophical skepticism, not the popular practice associated with that word of confidently proclaiming the dominant belief about any given topic is correct with absolute certainty without carefully examining the evidence systematically on both sides of an issue, which I personally call pseudo-skepticism).

This is not really true.
Agree to disagree. Just because the person who wrote the conference website isn’t a native speaker of English and has non standard grammar and other telltale signs of “predatory” conferences doesn’t actually make doing work at that conference any less objectively valuable. In my humble opinion, if submissions are peer reviewed and attendees do typical conference activities, then it is a legitimate conference. The other factors used in determining this are irrelevant from my perspective. Legitimacy is mostly in the eye of the beholder.

Look I obviously struck a nerve. I don't mean to be harsh, but that wall of text is a bit cringe. There's a lot to unpack but I'm not out here trying to attack you. I'm glad that you are finding success, but I would tone it back. This is the internet and it doesn't really matter but man, don't say this stuff out loud to anyone.
Well, I found the attitudes and implications of your text cringey too, frankly, which is why I responded so honestly. But yes, these are not popular opinions or perspectives. People who think more like you are in the majority. So, I do not share them so openly in real life, although I do sometimes more subtly try to promote critical thinking here and there when I see an opportunity.
 
Honestly, I’ve only been considered an expert at one thing in my life…

My CV: Expert at the original Red and Blue Version of Pokémon on the GameBoy!

*they fixed the MissingNo. Glitch…

My CV: Use to own a GameBoy…
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
Honestly, I’ve only been considered an expert at one thing in my life…

My CV: Expert at the original Red and Blue Version of Pokémon on the GameBoy!

*they fixed the MissingNo. Glitch…

My CV: Use to own a GameBoy…
Who was your main Pokémon?

Edit: Nidoking 4 lyfe

Ignore the flareon profile pic
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 1 users
I used to rule the playground in the red/blue days with my cheesy AF 6 Mewtwo team. Stomped all the kids.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Wait I could have been listing Pokemon Champion on my resume this whole time? Should I separate by region or will that look like padding?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
Wait I could have been listing Pokemon Champion on my resume this whole time? Should I separate by region or will that look like padding?
Yes sir, these are the kinds of things employers need to know about. How will they know what kind of physician you are without a separate detailed explanation for each region?

And, apart from my world-renowned expertise at losing to my friends at Halo, not to toot my own horn, but I’m kind of a world-class expert in farting those three tones from Close Encounters of the Third Kind when the aliens want to lure you in for a light probin’ or something. I’m not gonna lie, it’s an emerging and pretty highfalutin field. My revolutionary innovation was to change which sphincter muscles we use to do it, eventually winning out over the Vienna School’s antiquated butt-clenching method. Needless to say, I proudly have this animated and highlighted in flashing neon colors, bolded, bedazzled, italicized, and written in Wingdings at the top of my resume.
 
Who was your main Pokémon?

Edit: Nidoking 4 lyfe

Ignore the flareon profile pic
I was all about that Poliwrath! Had like two sheets of them. Looking back, I really had the potential to become the next Jordan Belfort…

Me: “ok, dude! Brian is about to walk around the corner any minute now! When he does, I need you to freak out over this Standard Box set Machamp and say how you want it sooo bad!”

Best Friend: “Why it’s just a Machamp?!”

Me: “Yeah but Brian just got that mint Alakazam and I want to snake him on it! Plus, Brian is a spoiled b****. His mom just bought him the Blink-182 CD.”

Best friend: “yeah, f Brian.”

***this is a made up story and does not portray real events… Also, if you’re reading this Brian, I’m not sorry.

Updates CV: Negotiated acquisitions for a physical asset portfolio.
 
Top