This Guardian article reports how a fake (flawed) article was accepted for publication in 157 open access journals in a sting operation by John Bohannon. Bohannon found that whilst some journals actually accepted the paper without any peer review, of the 106 journals that did peer-review it, 70% accepted it even though there were obvious, simple flaws that should have been detected.
This is a major embarrassment for the journals involved and I am happy to report that we are not one of them. All work is subject to some level of peer review at JHND. Indeed our processes are robust enough that as Editor I cannot have any influence over anything with my own name on it as an author. However, it is clear that there are significant issues with peer review- I have said this before on this blog. Until somebody can come up with something more objective, to a large extent we will have to rely on integrity of the people involved in the publication process at all levels and hope that the number of hoaxes, the fake and the downright dangerous that slip through the safeguards remain a tiny minority of the mass of material that is published.