From the Editors' Desk: Self-Plagiarism and Other Editorial Crimes and Misdemeanors.
From the Editors' Desk: Self-Plagiarism and Other Editorial Crimes and Misdemeanors.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11606-010-1562-z
复制
发表时间：
2010-11-09
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
Feldman, Mitchell D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kravitz, Richard L.;Feldman, Mitchell D.
科学期刊是知识和思想的货币。JGIM对读者的承诺（因此也是我们对作者的期望）是，杂志上发表的材料是原创的。但是，一件作品的“原创性”意味着什么呢？当然，所有的科学著作都有一个知识遗产;甚至牛顿也站在巨人的肩膀上。然而，即使在最好的情况下，一个想法的出处也可能不容易从参考清单中辨别出来。环境并不总是理想的。最近，JGIM的编辑们注意到，刚刚在另一本杂志上在线发表的一篇手稿（文章B）与大约六个月前在JGIM上发表的一篇手稿（文章A）有明显的相似之处。仔细检查后，有理由感到关切。这两篇论文都报告了对质量改进干预措施的准实验性评价。标题、副标题和摘要相似，方法部分几乎相同。此外，导言和讨论部分的整个段落几乎都是一样的，难道犯了编辑罪？如果是的话，这是重罪，轻罪，还是仅仅是一个类似于乱穿马路的技术性违规？在这种情况下，编辑的首要任务是确立事实。对这两篇发表的论文进行仔细比较后发现，在两个独立的住院患者环境中引入（并评估）了相同的干预措施：一个涉及家庭工作人员，另一个没有。此外，患者人群、研究设计和分析方法不同。那么，如果同一作者发表了两篇论文，使用了许多相同的词汇来报道两种相似但不同的干预措施，该怎么办呢？什么是自我剽窃，它是如何定义的（如果它存在的话）？为了回答这个问题，我们求助于出版伦理委员会（http：//publicationethics. org）和世界医学编辑协会（www. wame。org），以及其他资源。在将编辑后的案例提交到WAME列表服务器的几个小时内，我们收到了一些有用的回复，其中包括来自圣约翰大学的Miguel Roig的回复。在以前的著作中，罗伊格认为自我剽窃存在于四种形式中。重复发布是指在多个项目中发布相同的结果。萨拉米
S cientific journals trade in the currency of knowledge and ideas. JGIM’s commitment to readers (and therefore our expectation of authors) is that material published in the journal is original. But what does it mean for a piece of work to be “original?” Certainly all scientific writing has an intellectual heritage; even Newton stood on the shoulders of giants. Yet even in the best of circumstances, the provenance of an idea may not be readily discernable from the reference list. And circumstances are not always ideal. Recently, it came to the attention of JGIM’s editors that a manuscript just published online in another journal (Article B) bore a clear resemblance to a manuscript published in JGIM approximately six months earlier (Article A). On closer inspection, there was reason for concern. Both papers reported on a quasi-experimental evaluation of a quality improvement intervention. The titles, by-lines, and abstracts were similar and the methods sections almost identical. Moreover, entire paragraphs of the introduction and discussion sections were almost the same.Had an editorial crime been committed? And if so, was this a felony, a misdemeanor, or merely a technical breech akin to jaywalking? The first job of an editor in such circumstances is to establish the facts. Careful comparison of the two published papers showed that the same intervention was introduced (and evaluated) in two discrete inpatient settings: one involving housestaff, the other not. Furthermore, the patient populations, study designs, and analytic methods were distinct. What then, to make of a case where the same authors publish two papers using many of the same words to report on two similar but distinct interventions? What is self-plagiarism and how is it defined (if it exists at all)? To answer this question, we turned to the Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics. org) and the World Association of Medical Editors (www. wame. org), among other resources. Within hours of submitting the redacted case to the WAME listserv, we received a number of helpful replies, including one from Miguel Roig of St. Johns University. In prior writings, Roig has argued that self-plagiarism exists in four forms. Duplicate publication is publishing the same results in more than one article. Salami