Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Duplicate Publication

Duplicate Publication Funding agencies, study participants, and investigators work on the expectation that the results of a research study will be published and widely disseminated. Not to do so is a disservice to both the funding agency and the human subjects who participated in the research, as well as disrespectful to colleagues involved with the study. The desire to communicate results quickly coupled with the interest of faculty in securing additional publications can spawn many manuscripts from a single research effort. Accordingly, it is important to consider how many manuscripts should be written and what to logically include in each. How to divide up the data from a research project into different manuscripts is a difficult decision that relies heavily on the judgment of the contributing authors. There are few hard and fast rules. One major article published in a high-quality journal that provides a clear answer to a question is often more useful to both readers and authors than 2 or 3 smaller articles that focus on narrowly defined components of the larger question. On the other hand, articles that attempt to cover too much ground often come across as diffuse and may have a message that is difficult to extract. Duplication arises if 2 or more manuscripts by overlapping authors use the same source of data and either (1) the manuscripts address essentially the same question or (2) the 2 manuscripts could be readily combined into 1, thereby presenting more information in less space. The issue is one of overlap. The authors overlap, the source of data overlaps, and the questions addressed overlap. How much overlap is too much? If authors feel that more than 1 manuscript is justified from the same source of data, they should fully inform all editors about all submitted papers and published articles that use the same source of data (not necessarily the same data but the same source) and that overlap to any degree. Prior or concurrent research projects with significant overlap, whether in drafting stages or under review, should be explicitly acknowledged in both the cover letter to the editors as well as the manuscript itself. Failure to do so begs the question of why. So long as the editors are kept informed, improper duplicate publication can be avoided. The concept of the "same source of data" is important and deserves clarification. One could use vital statistics data from 1 period in 1 manuscript and then vital statistics data from another period, with identical analyses in both. While these data would be on different people, the source is the same and if the analysis is the same, it would be a duplicate publication. On the other hand, if an author uses 1 source of data and writes about male subjects in 1 study and female subjects in another, this might not be duplicate publication, although many journals might wish these be combined to save space. As editors, if we feel that the amount of new knowledge contributed by a manuscript is minimal, the manuscript will be rejected. Separate analyses of subgroups, once the large group has been analyzed and published, run the risk of crossing the line of duplicate publication. We encountered this recently with an article published in the ARCHIVES and a subanalysis published elsewhere. These were subsequently labeled by the National Library of Medicine as duplicate publications. A recent study of duplicate publications uncovered in meta-analyses has pointed out the frequency of this problem.1 Our instructions to authors, and those of all scientific publications at the American Medical Association, ask that "copies of possibly duplicative material that has been previously published or is being considered elsewhere must be provided at the time of manuscript submission."2(p100) This is also clearly stated in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals,3 endorsed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The guiding principle is that editors must know and have access to material that might be considered duplicative. The final decision is theirs. References 1. von Elm EPoglia GWalder BTramer MR Different patterns of duplicate publication: an analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA. 2004;291974- 980PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 2. Iverson CLFlanagin AFontanarosa PB et al. American Medical Association Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 9th ed. Baltimore, Md Williams & Wilkins1998; 3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Available at:http://www.icmje.orgAccessed May 1, 2004 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine American Medical Association

Duplicate Publication

Abstract

Funding agencies, study participants, and investigators work on the expectation that the results of a research study will be published and widely disseminated. Not to do so is a disservice to both the funding agency and the human subjects who participated in the research, as well as disrespectful to colleagues involved with the study. The desire to communicate results quickly coupled with the interest of faculty in securing additional publications can spawn many manuscripts from a single...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/duplicate-publication-AQTHvOD9yf
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
1072-4710
eISSN
1538-3628
DOI
10.1001/archpedi.158.9.926
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Funding agencies, study participants, and investigators work on the expectation that the results of a research study will be published and widely disseminated. Not to do so is a disservice to both the funding agency and the human subjects who participated in the research, as well as disrespectful to colleagues involved with the study. The desire to communicate results quickly coupled with the interest of faculty in securing additional publications can spawn many manuscripts from a single research effort. Accordingly, it is important to consider how many manuscripts should be written and what to logically include in each. How to divide up the data from a research project into different manuscripts is a difficult decision that relies heavily on the judgment of the contributing authors. There are few hard and fast rules. One major article published in a high-quality journal that provides a clear answer to a question is often more useful to both readers and authors than 2 or 3 smaller articles that focus on narrowly defined components of the larger question. On the other hand, articles that attempt to cover too much ground often come across as diffuse and may have a message that is difficult to extract. Duplication arises if 2 or more manuscripts by overlapping authors use the same source of data and either (1) the manuscripts address essentially the same question or (2) the 2 manuscripts could be readily combined into 1, thereby presenting more information in less space. The issue is one of overlap. The authors overlap, the source of data overlaps, and the questions addressed overlap. How much overlap is too much? If authors feel that more than 1 manuscript is justified from the same source of data, they should fully inform all editors about all submitted papers and published articles that use the same source of data (not necessarily the same data but the same source) and that overlap to any degree. Prior or concurrent research projects with significant overlap, whether in drafting stages or under review, should be explicitly acknowledged in both the cover letter to the editors as well as the manuscript itself. Failure to do so begs the question of why. So long as the editors are kept informed, improper duplicate publication can be avoided. The concept of the "same source of data" is important and deserves clarification. One could use vital statistics data from 1 period in 1 manuscript and then vital statistics data from another period, with identical analyses in both. While these data would be on different people, the source is the same and if the analysis is the same, it would be a duplicate publication. On the other hand, if an author uses 1 source of data and writes about male subjects in 1 study and female subjects in another, this might not be duplicate publication, although many journals might wish these be combined to save space. As editors, if we feel that the amount of new knowledge contributed by a manuscript is minimal, the manuscript will be rejected. Separate analyses of subgroups, once the large group has been analyzed and published, run the risk of crossing the line of duplicate publication. We encountered this recently with an article published in the ARCHIVES and a subanalysis published elsewhere. These were subsequently labeled by the National Library of Medicine as duplicate publications. A recent study of duplicate publications uncovered in meta-analyses has pointed out the frequency of this problem.1 Our instructions to authors, and those of all scientific publications at the American Medical Association, ask that "copies of possibly duplicative material that has been previously published or is being considered elsewhere must be provided at the time of manuscript submission."2(p100) This is also clearly stated in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals,3 endorsed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The guiding principle is that editors must know and have access to material that might be considered duplicative. The final decision is theirs. References 1. von Elm EPoglia GWalder BTramer MR Different patterns of duplicate publication: an analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA. 2004;291974- 980PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref 2. Iverson CLFlanagin AFontanarosa PB et al. American Medical Association Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 9th ed. Baltimore, Md Williams & Wilkins1998; 3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Available at:http://www.icmje.orgAccessed May 1, 2004

Journal

Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent MedicineAmerican Medical Association

Published: Sep 1, 2004

Keywords: duplicate publications

References