No abstract

Objectives: To examine the perspectives of journal editors and authors on overlapping and redundant publications in clinical research. Design: Pretested cross-sectional survey, containing both forced choice and open ended questions, administered by mail to the senior editors (N=99) and one randomly selected author (N=99) from all journals in the Abridged Index Medicus (1996) that published clinical research. Main measurements: The views of editors and authors about the extent of redundant publications, why they occur, how to prevent and respond to cases, and when the publication of overlapping manuscripts is justified. Results: Seventy two per cent (N=71) of editors and 65% (N=64) of authors completed the survey. There was consensus between both groups that redundant publications occur because authors feel the pressure to publish and journals do not do enough to publicise, criticise, and punish cases, and that the publication of most types of overlapping articles is unacceptable. Sixty seven per cent of authors but only 31% of editors felt, however, that it was justified to publish an overlapping article in a nonpeer reviewed symposium supplement, and 68% of editors but 39% of authors supported imposing restrictions on guilty authors' future submissions. In written comments, 15% to 30% of both groups emphasised that it was justified to publish overlapping articles when there were different or non-English-speaking audiences, new data, strengthened methods, or disputed findings. Conclusions: Editors, authors, and other academic leaders should together develop explicit guidelines that clarify points of contention and ambiguity regarding overlapping manuscripts.

Regeneration of mineralized and soft connective tissue components of the attachment apparatus is the main goal in the treatment of periodontal diseases. Often, apical migration of epithelium (long junctional epithelium) effectively prevents the formation of bone and connective tissue attachment after periodontal surgery. The purpose of the present study was to compare conventional periodontal surgery combined with carbon dioxide laser and conventional periodontal surgery alone with respect to epithelial elimination and degree of necrosis of mucoperiosteal flaps. After signing a consent form, five patients with at least two comparable bilateral periodontal defects needing pocket elimination surgery participated in this study. The investigators randomly divided each side into test and control sites. Each patient received oral hygiene instruction and initial therapy prior to surgery. At surgery, the test site received a sulcular incision and carbon dioxide laser de-epithelialization of the outer and inner aspects of the flap. The control group received reverse bevel incision only. The surgeon performed open flap debridement on all teeth. At the time of surgery, the surgeon did a biopsy of each site and submitted specimens for histologic evaluation. A matched pairs t-test was used to analyze the data. The results show significant differences between the carbon dioxide laser and reverse bevel incision with respect to sulcular (P < or = 0.025) and gingival (external) (P < or = 0.01) flap surface epithelial elimination and tissue necrosis (P < or = 0.005). These results should be replicated with a larger number of subjects. The carbon dioxide laser eliminated sulcular and gingival (external) epithelium without disturbing underlying connective tissue. This finding supports the concept that the carbon dioxide wavelength has little or no effect on tissues beyond the target. However, neither laser nor blade eliminated all the epithelium. Researchers observed chronic inflammation in the control and test sites, with a predominance of plasma cells. Lining the sulcular and gingival (external) lased areas, investigators found coagulation necrosis covered by fibrin and coagulated blood. The laser appears to effectively remove epithelium at the time of surgery; however, future long-term, well-controlled quantitative histologic studies are needed to evaluate the effect of repeated carbon dioxide laser de-epithelialization of the gingival (external) surface of mucoperiosteal flaps at intervals during the healing period.

No abstract

No abstract