The practice of duplicate publication has been condemned widely in the scientific community and several studies have been conducted to establish the level of the problem in various surgical fields. A retrospective review of original articles from the British Journal of Plastic Surgery and Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery during 2000 was conducted, using Medline (PubMed). A total of 431 abstracts were screened, from which 27 index articles related to 33 'suspected redundant' publications. Further evaluation was carried out by comparing the full text versions of these articles and assigning a grade of non-dual, dual, potentially dual and 'salami-slicing'. Only four suspect articles were confirmed as having some degree of redundancy, and these related to three index articles (3/431, <1%). The incidence of duplication in plastic surgery literature seems to be much lower compared to other surgical specialties, providing reassurance for reviewers, editors and readers of these journals.

译文

重复出版的做法在科学界受到广泛谴责,并且已经进行了几项研究以确定各个外科领域的问题水平。使用Medline (PubMed) 对《英国整形外科杂志》和《整形与重建外科2000年》的原始文章进行了回顾性审查。总共筛选了431篇摘要,其中27篇索引文章与33篇 “可疑冗余” 出版物有关。通过比较这些文章的全文版本并分配非对偶,对偶,潜在对偶和 “萨拉米切片” 等级来进行进一步评估。仅四个可疑文章被确认为具有一定程度的冗余,并且这些与三个索引文章有关 (3/431,<1%)。与其他外科专业相比,整形外科文献中重复的发生率似乎要低得多,这为这些期刊的审阅者,编辑和读者提供了保证。

+1
+2
100研值 100研值 ¥99课程
检索文献一次
下载文献一次

去下载>

成功解锁2个技能,为你点赞

《SCI写作十大必备语法》
解决你的SCI语法难题!

技能熟练度+1

视频课《玩转文献检索》
让你成为检索达人!

恭喜完成新手挑战

手机微信扫一扫,添加好友领取

免费领《Endnote文献管理工具+教程》

微信扫码, 免费领取

手机登录

获取验证码
登录