Duplicate publication in systematic reviews on perioperative medicine

Poglia, Greta; Elm, Erik von; Walder, Bernhard; Tramèr, Martin R.

doi:10.1186/2048-4623-1-s3-op034

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This led to an overestimation of this drug's efficacy by 23%. It should be evident from this one example that duplicate publication is a threat for scientists conducting systematic reviews and, more importantly, biases the conclusions on drug efficacy and safety (63).…”

Section: Duplicate Publicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics and scientific publication

Benos¹,

Fabres

Farmer³

et al. 2005

Advances in Physiology Education

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article summarizes the major categories of ethical violations encountered during submission, review, and publication of scientific articles. We discuss data fabrication and falsification, plagiarism, redundant and duplicate publication, conflict of interest, authorship, animal and human welfare, and reviewer responsibility. In each section, pertinent historical background and citation of relevant regulations and statutes are provided. Furthermore, a specific case(s) derived from actual situations is(are) presented. These cases were chosen to highlight the complexities that investigators and journals must face when dealing with ethical issues. A series of discussion questions follow each case. It is our hope that by increasing education and awareness of ethical matters relevant to scientific investigation and publication, deviations from appropriate conduct will be reduced.

show abstract

Section: Duplicate Publicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics and scientific publication

Benos¹,

Fabres

Farmer³

et al. 2005

Advances in Physiology Education

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Ethical Considerations in the Interpretation and Communication of Clinical Trial Results

Coultas¹

2007

Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ethical interpretation and communication of research results is essential to ensure the validity, timeliness, and accessibility of new knowledge for patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies. Failure to adhere to ethical principles may cause adverse outcomes for patients because of overestimation of benefit, underestimation of harm, and lack of timely awareness of benefit or harm. Although fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism are the traditional criteria for research misconduct, other more subtle behaviors may cause greater threats to public safety and trust in the research enterprise. Growing awareness of research misconduct has led to a number of initiatives worldwide during the past decade in an attempt to control the problem at various stages of the research process through the funding agencies, research institutions, and editorial oversight. The objective of this article is to raise awareness among the pulmonary research community of the broad range of ethical issues that arise during manuscript preparation, review, publication, and dissemination of research results, and efforts that are in progress to minimize misconduct.

show abstract

Duplicate publication in systematic reviews on perioperative medicine

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Ethics and scientific publication

Ethics and scientific publication

Ethical Considerations in the Interpretation and Communication of Clinical Trial Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About