Reference accuracy in four rehabilitation journals

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of reference errors in major peer-reviewed general physical therapy and rehabilitation journals (American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AJPMR), Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (APMR), Clinical Rehabilitation (CR) and Physical Therapy (PT)). DESIGN: Descriptive, comparative. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All issues of the AJPMR, APMR, CR and PT between 2003 and 2007 were studied. For each journal, references from articles were consecutively numbered, and using a random number generator, 100 references were selected from each journal. For each reference, ease of retrieval on MEDLINE and the presence of citation errors were noted. If discrepancies were identified, the reference was compared with the original publication. Two observers independently evaluated each reference for citation errors. RESULTS: The total number of citations with errors among all published journals was 123 (30.7%). The reference error rates by journal ranged from 23% to 44%. Most errors (48.0%) occurred in the author element, followed by the title (31.7%), journal (8.9%), page (5.7%), year (4.1%), and volume (1.6%). Only 8 (2%) were likely to make retrieval of the reference difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Errors in references still appear in current physical therapy and rehabilitation literature, but most are not severe.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.