Arrivé Lionel, Lewin Maïté, Dono Pascale, Monnier-Cholley Laurence, Hoeffel Christine, Tubiana Jean-Michel
Department of Radiology, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris et Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie, 184 rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, 75012 Paris, France.
Radiology. 2008 Jun;247(3):836-40. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2473070969. Epub 2008 Apr 10.
To retrospectively quantify the incidence of redundant publication in the journal Radiology and to compare the present study findings with those published for other journals and medical specialties.
Two readers estimated the incidence of the redundant publication of original articles in Radiology in the year 2001. Original research articles published in 2001 were analyzed by searching MEDLINE on the PubMed server to identify articles that may have represented a duplication of the original Radiology article. MEDLINE was searched between January 1999 and December 2003 by using the surname and initial(s) of the first author. Potentially redundant articles were identified after similarities in titles and abstracts were analyzed. The full versions of all potentially redundant articles and of the corresponding index articles were then retrieved from the library. The potentially redundant article was then compared with the index article. Criteria for redundant publication were as follows: Compared with the index article, the potentially duplicate article had (a) a similar hypothesis, (b) a similar number of subjects, (c) similar results, (d) at least one author in common, and (e) no or little new information.
In 2001, 362 original research articles were published in Radiology. Two instances of redundant publication were found among these articles, and both were considered to be partially redundant publications due to series expansions (ie, increased numbers of study subjects) of 50% and 52%.
Redundant publication appears to be less frequent in Radiology than in the other journals and specialties for which redundant publication information has been reported.
回顾性量化《放射学》杂志中重复发表的发生率，并将本研究结果与其他杂志及医学专业已发表的结果进行比较。
两名读者估计了2001年《放射学》杂志中原发性文章重复发表的发生率。通过在PubMed服务器上搜索MEDLINE来分析2001年发表的原发性研究文章，以识别可能是《放射学》杂志原文重复的文章。使用第一作者的姓氏和名字首字母在1999年1月至2003年12月期间搜索MEDLINE。在分析标题和摘要的相似性后识别出潜在的重复文章。然后从图书馆检索所有潜在重复文章及其相应索引文章的全文。接着将潜在重复文章与索引文章进行比较。重复发表的标准如下：与索引文章相比，潜在重复文章具有（a）相似的假设，（b）相似数量的研究对象，（c）相似的结果，（d）至少有一位共同作者，以及（e）没有或几乎没有新信息。
2001年，《放射学》杂志发表了362篇原发性研究文章。在这些文章中发现了两例重复发表的情况，由于研究对象数量分别增加了50%和52%，这两例均被认为是部分重复发表。
与已报道重复发表信息的其他杂志和专业相比，《放射学》杂志中重复发表的情况似乎较少。
