Reference Errors in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Literature

Abstract

Objective Proper use of citation and quotation is crucial to the integrity of the medical literature. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of quotation and citation errors in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) journals and how they have changed over time. Study Design Literature review. Methods Fifty references were randomly selected from the first published issue of 2017 for 8 leading OHNS journals. These were analyzed for errors in citation (data elements by which the article is referenced) and quotation (factual inaccuracies of the reference). Citation errors were categorized as major, intermediate, or minor. Quotation errors were categorized as major or minor. Results were compared with data from 1997 articles. Results Citation errors occurred in 17% of all references studied, with 34% classified as major. Quotation errors occurred in 9%, with 69% classified as major. There was no association between journal impact factor and total number of errors ( r = -0.33, P = .42). This compares with a 37% citation error rate (32% major) and 17% quotation error rate (65% major) from 1997. Conclusion Citation and quotation errors are still prevalent in the OHNS literature albeit decreased from previously reported data. Improvement in citation errors may be due to technological improvements in reference management. However, it is the continued responsibility of the authors, reviewers, and editors to further reduce error rates to maintain the integrity of our publications.

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 — 24 citations exist upstream.

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