How accurate are the references in Emergency Medical Journal?

The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Citation

Citation, the act of properly referring to others' ideas, thoughts, or concepts, is a common and critical practice in scientific writing. Citations are used to give credit to own work, to support an argument, to acknowledge others' work, to distinguish other authors' ideas from one's work, and to direct readers to sources of information. A good citation adds to the scientific prestige of the paper and makes it more valuable to the reader. The citation has three basic elements: quoting from others, an in-text reference to the source, and bibliographic details of the source. Beyond technical skills, the citation needs an in-depth knowledge of the field and should follow basic rules, including the selection of relevant and valid sources, stating information/facts from others' work, and referring to others' work accurately and ethically. Several systems and styles are used to cite scientific sources; however, the most commonly used systems in medical sciences are 'author-date' systems (e.g., Harvard system) and numerical systems (e.g., Vancouver system). Here, we discuss how to make an accurate, complete, and ethical citation, and provide simple and practical guides to organize references in a scientific medical paper.

Accuracy of references in Indian journal of otolaryngology and head & neck surgery

This study was done to observe the accuracy of references in articles published in Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery. There were 63 references randomly selected from different issues of Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery (IJOHNS). It includes: Volume 61, Number 4, December 2009 and Volume 62, Number 1, January 2010. References were examined in details by dividing them into six elements and they were compared with the original for accuracy. References not cited from indexed journals were excluded. Statistical analysis was done by using frequency and percentage. Results show that 30.1% references in Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery were incorrect. Most common errors were author's name and journal name. Author's names were found to be incorrect in 11.1% references while journal name were found to be incorrect in 6.3%. Errors in citing the references are also found in the Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery. The quoted error in this study is comparable to other international literatures. The majority of errors are avoidable. So, the authors, editors and the reviewers have to check for any errors seriously before publication in the journal.

Accuracy of references in burns journals

AIMS

To study the incidence and risk factors for citation and quotation errors in two major burns surgery journals.

METHODS

120 references were randomly selected from original articles published in the following two journals - January to December 2006 issues of Burns and Journal of Burn Care & Research. For each reference, the ease of retrieval on PubMed and the presence of citation errors were noted. Two independent observers analysed each reference for quotation errors. The characteristics of the root article, that is, type of study, author numbers, number of references and article word count were noted.

RESULTS

Of the 120 selected references, 117 referred to articles from indexed medical journals published in English. Among these, 4 articles could not be retrieved due to fatal citation errors (3.3%). A further 12 citation errors were noted giving a total citation error rate of 13.3% (95% CI: 6.74-19.93%). Of the 117 references analysed, the quotation error rate was 13.7% (95% CI: 8.6-19.5%) half of which were major errors. There was no significant association between the combined error rate per article and the journal (Kruskal-Wallis test; p=0.861, type of study (Kruskal-Wallis test; p=0.717), author numbers (Spearman's rho=0.197, p=0.423), article length (Spearman's rho=0.118, p=0.705) or references per article (Spearman's rho=0.229, p=0.189).

CONCLUSION

Significant numbers of citation and quotation errors still appear in current burns literature. Incorrect spelling of author names and partial omissions of article titles were the two most common errors. No observable underlying factors were identified in this study. The present results serve as a reminder to authors, editors and peer reviewers for more care of citation accuracy when striving for their common goal of scientific excellence.

Technical editing of research reports in biomedical journals

BACKGROUND

Most journals try to improve their articles by technical editing processes such as proof-reading, editing to conform to 'house styles', grammatical conventions and checking accuracy of cited references. Despite the considerable resources devoted to technical editing, we do not know whether it improves the accessibility of biomedical research findings or the utility of articles. This is an update of a Cochrane methodology review first published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of technical editing on research reports in peer-reviewed biomedical journals, and to assess the level of accuracy of references to these reports.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007; MEDLINE (last searched July 2006); EMBASE (last searched June 2007) and checked relevant articles for further references. We also searched the Internet and contacted researchers and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective or retrospective comparative studies of technical editing processes applied to original research articles in biomedical journals, as well as studies of reference accuracy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed each study against the selection criteria and assessed the methodological quality of each study. One review author extracted the data, and the second review author repeated this.

MAIN RESULTS

We located 32 studies addressing technical editing and 66 surveys of reference accuracy. Only three of the studies were randomised controlled trials. A 'package' of largely unspecified editorial processes applied between acceptance and publication was associated with improved readability in two studies and improved reporting quality in another two studies, while another study showed mixed results after stricter editorial policies were introduced. More intensive editorial processes were associated with fewer errors in abstracts and references. Providing instructions to authors was associated with improved reporting of ethics requirements in one study and fewer errors in references in two studies, but no difference was seen in the quality of abstracts in one randomised controlled trial. Structuring generally improved the quality of abstracts, but increased their length. The reference accuracy studies showed a median citation error rate of 38% and a median quotation error rate of 20%.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Surprisingly few studies have evaluated the effects of technical editing rigorously. However there is some evidence that the 'package' of technical editing used by biomedical journals does improve papers. A substantial number of references in biomedical articles are cited or quoted inaccurately.