Altman L K
Lancet. 1996 May 18;347(9012):1382-6. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(96)91016-8.
It is 27 years since Dr Franz Ingelfinger announced that a manuscript would be rejected by his journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, if it had been published elsewhere. Many other medical journals have since adopted this so-called Ingelfinger rule. The restrictions resulting from the rule have generated enormous controversy in medical journalism, as shown by the first of the two-part article The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review. Critics say that the rule restricts the free flow of information, whereas proponents claim that information from a paper released early may be inaccurate because the paper has not been subjected to peer review. Yet peer review itself has also come under scrutiny, with its many limitations rarely being openly discussed.
自弗朗茨·英格尔芬格博士宣布，如果一篇稿件已在其他地方发表，他所在的《新英格兰医学杂志》将拒绝发表以来，已经过去了27年。此后，许多其他医学期刊也采用了这一所谓的英格尔芬格规则。正如《英格尔芬格规则、禁运与期刊同行评议》这篇分两部分的文章的第一部分所显示的那样，该规则所带来的限制在医学新闻界引发了巨大争议。批评者称该规则限制了信息的自由流动，而支持者则声称，提前发布的论文中的信息可能不准确，因为该论文尚未经过同行评议。然而，同行评议本身也受到了审视，其诸多局限性却很少被公开讨论。
