Background Scientific research can offer the joy of discovery. For many graduating neurosurgeons, often, a seminar, class, or instructional module is their first and only formal exposure to the world of conducting research responsibly, to write down and report the results of such research. The pressure to publish scientific research is high, but any young neurosurgeon who is unaware of how predatory publishers operate can get duped by it and can lose their valuable and hard-fought research. Hence, we have attempted to provide an overview of all potentially predatory neurosurgery publications and provide some “red flags” to recognize them. Methods A suspected list of predatory publications was collected via a thorough review of the Neurosurgery journals listed in 4 major so-called blacklists, ie, Beall’s list, Manca’s list, Cabell’s blacklist, and Strinzel blacklist and then cross-referenced with UGC CARE whitelist to remove any potential legitimate journals. All journals with a scope of the Neurosurgery publication were searched using terms in the search bar:“Neurosurgery”,“Neuroanatomy”,“Neuropathology”, and “Neurological disorder/disease”. Since all predatory journals claim to be open access, all possible types of open access journals on Scimago were also searched, and thus a comparison was possible in terms of publication cost and number of legitimate open access journals when compared with predatory ones. In addition, methodologies by which these journals penetrate legitimate indexes like PubMed was investigated. Results A total of 46 predatory journals were found and were enlisted along with their publishers and web addresses. Sixty of the 360 Neurosurgery journals listed on Scimago were open access and the fee for the predatory journals was substantially lower (< 150)whencomparedwithlegitimatejournals( 900–3000).Sixtypesofopenaccesstypesexistwhileatotalof26redflagsin7stagesofpublicationcanbefoundinpredatoryjournals.Thesejournalshavepenetratedindexesbyhavingsimilarnamestolegitimatejournalsandbypublishingarticleswithexternalfundingwhichmandatetheirindexing.ConclusionThese46journalsweredefinedaspredatoryby4majorblacklists,andnoneofthemwasfoundintheUGCCarewhitelist.Theyalsofulfillthe26red-flagsthatdefineapredatoryjournal.Theblacklistdetailedheremaybecomeredundant;hence“wheneverindoubt”regardingajournalwith“red-flags”,theauthorsareadvisedtorefertowhiteliststobeonthesaferside.Publishinginpredatoryjournalsleadstonotonlylossofvaluableresearchbutalsodiscreditsaresearcheramonghispeersandcanbehindranceincareerprogression.SomejournalsareevenindexedonPubMed,andtheyhavesophisticatedwebpagesandhigh-qualityonlinepresentations.