Durani Piyush
University of Manchester, Manchester Incubator Building, 48 Grafton Street, Manchester M13 9XX, UK.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2006;59(9):975-7. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2005.11.039. Epub 2006 Mar 23.
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.
重复发表的行为在科学界受到广泛谴责，并且已经开展了多项研究来确定各个外科领域中该问题的严重程度。使用医学在线数据库（PubMed）对2000年期间发表于《英国整形外科杂志》和《整形与再造外科杂志》的原创文章进行了回顾性分析。共筛选了431篇摘要，从中找出了27篇索引文章，这些文章与33篇“疑似冗余”出版物相关。通过比较这些文章的全文版本并给出非重复、重复、潜在重复和“切香肠式分割”的等级，进行了进一步评估。只有4篇可疑文章被确认为存在一定程度的冗余，且这些文章与3篇索引文章相关（431篇中的3篇，<1%）。与其他外科专科相比，整形外科学术文献中的重复发生率似乎要低得多，这让这些期刊的审稿人、编辑和读者放心。
