• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

分析与纠正不当图像重复:经验。

Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: the Experience.

机构信息

uBiome Inc., San Francisco, California, USA.

Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

出版信息

Mol Cell Biol. 2018 Sep 28;38(20). doi: 10.1128/MCB.00309-18. Print 2018 Oct 15.

DOI:10.1128/MCB.00309-18
PMID:30037982
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6168979/
Abstract

We analyzed 960 papers published in (MCB) from 2009 to 2016 and found 59 (6.1%) to contain inappropriately duplicated images. The 59 instances of inappropriate image duplication led to 41 corrections, 5 retractions, and 13 instances in which no action was taken. Our experience suggests that the majority of inappropriate image duplications result from errors during figure preparation that can be remedied by correction. Nevertheless, ∼10% of papers with inappropriate image duplications in MCB were retracted (∼0.5% of total). If this proportion is representative, then as many as 35,000 papers in the literature are candidates for retraction due to inappropriate image duplication. The resolution of inappropriate image duplication concerns after publication required an average of 6 h of journal staff time per published paper. MCB instituted a pilot program to screen images of accepted papers prior to publication that identified 12 manuscripts (14.5% out of 83) with image concerns in 2 months. The screening and correction of papers before publication required an average of 30 min of staff time per problematic paper. Image screening can identify papers with problematic images prior to publication, reduces postpublication problems, and requires less staff time than the correction of problems after publication.

摘要

我们分析了 2009 年至 2016 年在《分子细胞生物学》(MCB)上发表的 960 篇论文,发现其中有 59 篇(6.1%)含有不当重复的图像。这 59 个不当重复图像的实例导致了 41 次更正、5 次撤稿和 13 次未采取行动。我们的经验表明,大多数不当重复图像是由于在准备图像时出现错误而导致的,这些错误可以通过更正来纠正。然而,在 MCB 中,有不当重复图像的论文中约有 10%(约占总数的 0.5%)被撤稿。如果这一比例具有代表性,那么文献中就有多达 35000 篇论文因不当重复图像而需要撤稿。在发表后解决不当重复图像的问题需要平均每个已发表的论文花费 6 小时的期刊工作人员时间。MCB 实施了一项在发表前筛选已接受论文图像的试点计划,在两个月内发现了 12 篇(83 篇中的 14.5%)存在图像问题的手稿。在发表前筛选和更正论文平均需要每个有问题的论文花费 30 分钟的工作人员时间。图像筛选可以在发表前识别出有问题图像的论文,减少发表后的问题,并比发表后更正问题需要更少的工作人员时间。

相似文献

1
Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: the Experience.分析与纠正不当图像重复:经验。
Mol Cell Biol. 2018 Sep 28;38(20). doi: 10.1128/MCB.00309-18. Print 2018 Oct 15.
2
Figure errors, sloppy science, and fraud: keeping eyes on your data.图表错误、草率的科学和欺诈:密切关注您的数据。
J Clin Invest. 2019 Mar 25;129(5):1805-1807. doi: 10.1172/JCI128380.
3
Testing Hypotheses on Risk Factors for Scientific Misconduct via Matched-Control Analysis of Papers Containing Problematic Image Duplications.通过对包含有问题图像重复的论文进行匹配对照分析来检验科研不端行为风险因素的假设。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Jun;25(3):771-789. doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0023-7. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
4
Retracted publications and their citation in dental literature: A systematic review.撤稿文献及其在牙科学文献中的引用:系统评价。
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2020 Aug;6(4):383-390. doi: 10.1002/cre2.292. Epub 2020 Mar 31.
5
Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988-2008.为何以及如何期刊撤回文章?对 Medline 1988-2008 年撤稿的分析。
J Med Ethics. 2011 Sep;37(9):567-70. doi: 10.1136/jme.2010.040964. Epub 2011 Apr 12.
6
Publication rates after the first retraction for biomedical researchers with multiple retracted publications.多次撤稿的生物医学研究人员首次撤稿后的发表率。
Account Res. 2019 Jul;26(5):277-287. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1612244. Epub 2019 May 14.
7
Sources of error in the retracted scientific literature.撤回的科学文献中的错误来源。
FASEB J. 2014 Sep;28(9):3847-55. doi: 10.1096/fj.14-256735. Epub 2014 Jun 13.
8
Retracted publications in the drug literature.药物文献中的已撤回出版物。
Pharmacotherapy. 2012 Jul;32(7):586-95. doi: 10.1002/j.1875-9114.2012.01100.x. Epub 2012 May 11.
9
Retracted science and the retraction index.撤稿科学与撤稿指数。
Infect Immun. 2011 Oct;79(10):3855-9. doi: 10.1128/IAI.05661-11. Epub 2011 Aug 8.
10
Characteristics of retractions related to faked peer reviews: an overview.与伪造同行评审相关的撤稿特征概述
Postgrad Med J. 2017 Aug;93(1102):499-503. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-133969. Epub 2016 Sep 23.

引用本文的文献

1
How good are medical students and researchers in detecting duplications in digital images from research articles: a cross-sectional survey.医学生和研究人员在检测研究文章数字图像中的重复内容方面能力如何:一项横断面调查。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2025 Aug 8;10(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s41073-025-00172-0.
2
Experts fail to reliably detect AI-generated histological data.专家无法可靠地检测到 AI 生成的组织学数据。
Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 19;14(1):28677. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-73913-8.
3
The changing roles of scientific journals.科学期刊角色的转变。
mBio. 2024 Nov 13;15(11):e0251524. doi: 10.1128/mbio.02515-24. Epub 2024 Oct 4.
4
Stop just paying lip service on publication integrity.别再只在出版诚信问题上做表面文章了。
Nature. 2024 Aug;632(8023):26-28. doi: 10.1038/d41586-024-02449-8.
5
Community-developed checklists for publishing images and image analyses.社区开发的图像发布和图像分析检查表。
Nat Methods. 2024 Feb;21(2):170-181. doi: 10.1038/s41592-023-01987-9. Epub 2023 Sep 14.
6
Inappropriate image duplications in rhinology research publications.鼻科学研究出版物中不适当的图像复制。
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2024 Jan;14(1):119-122. doi: 10.1002/alr.23226. Epub 2023 Jul 11.
7
Community-developed checklists for publishing images and image analyses.社区开发的用于发表图像和图像分析的清单。
ArXiv. 2023 Sep 14:arXiv:2302.07005v2.
8
A Synthesis of the Formats for Correcting Erroneous and Fraudulent Academic Literature, and Associated Challenges.纠正错误和欺诈性学术文献的格式综述及相关挑战
J Gen Philos Sci. 2022;53(4):583-599. doi: 10.1007/s10838-022-09607-4. Epub 2022 Jun 1.
9
Do individual and institutional predictors of misconduct vary by country? Results of a matched-control analysis of problematic image duplications.个体和机构的不当行为预测因素是否因国家而异?对有问题的图像重复问题的匹配对照分析的结果。
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 2;17(3):e0255334. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255334. eCollection 2022.
10
Retracted articles in the biomedical literature from Indian authors.印度作者发表在生物医学文献中的撤稿文章。
Scientometrics. 2021;126(5):3965-3981. doi: 10.1007/s11192-021-03895-1. Epub 2021 Mar 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Researchers have finally created a tool to spot duplicated images across thousands of papers.研究人员最终创建了一种工具,用于在数千篇论文中识别重复的图像。
Nature. 2018 Mar;555(7694):18. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-02421-3.
2
RePAIR consensus guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record.《研究记录保护与诚信(RePAIR)共识指南:出版商、机构、组织及研究人员在保护研究记录完整性方面的职责》
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018 Dec 19;3:15. doi: 10.1186/s41073-018-0055-1. eCollection 2018.
3
Testing Hypotheses on Risk Factors for Scientific Misconduct via Matched-Control Analysis of Papers Containing Problematic Image Duplications.通过对包含有问题图像重复的论文进行匹配对照分析来检验科研不端行为风险因素的假设。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Jun;25(3):771-789. doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0023-7. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
4
A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.一项关于生物医学期刊稿件评审过程中同行评审员角色和任务的范围综述方案。
BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 22;7(10):e017468. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017468.
5
Setting the (Scientific) Record Straight: Responds to Postpublication Review.澄清(科学)记录:回应发表后审查
Mol Cell Biol. 2017 May 16;37(11). doi: 10.1128/MCB.00199-17. Print 2017 Jun 1.
6
Avoiding common pitfalls of manuscript and figure preparation.避免手稿和图表准备中的常见陷阱。
FEBS J. 2017 May;284(9):1262-1266. doi: 10.1111/febs.14020.
7
JOURNAL CLUB: Plagiarism in Manuscripts Submitted to the AJR: Development of an Optimal Screening Algorithm and Management Pathways.期刊俱乐部:提交给《美国放射学杂志》的稿件中的剽窃行为:最佳筛查算法及管理途径的制定
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Apr;208(4):712-720. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.17208. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
8
ASM Journals Eliminate Impact Factor Information from Journal Websites.美国微生物学会期刊从期刊网站上删除影响因子信息。
mBio. 2016 Jul 11;7(4):e01150-16. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01150-16.
9
The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications.生物医学研究出版物中不当图像重复的发生率
mBio. 2016 Jun 7;7(3):e00809-16. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00809-16.
10
Scientific misconduct encountered by APAME journals: an online survey.APAME 期刊所遭遇的科研不端行为:一项在线调查。
Malays J Pathol. 2015 Dec;37(3):213-8.