Articlehybrid2021

How accurate are citations of frequently cited papers in biomedical literature?

Vedrana R. Pavlovic · Tracey Lynn Weissgerber · Dejana M. Stanisavljevic · Tatjana D. Pekmezovic · Ognjen S. Milicevic · Jelena S. Milin-Lazovic +13 more

46 citations0/0 files storedClinical Science

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Academic Writing and Publishing Academic integrity and plagiarism

Abstract

Abstract Citations are an important, but often overlooked, part of every scientific paper. They allow the reader to trace the flow of evidence, serving as a gateway to relevant literature. Most scientists are aware of citations’ errors, but few appreciate the prevalence of these problems. The purpose of the present study was to examine how often frequently cited papers in biomedical scientific literature are cited inaccurately. The study included an active participation of the first authors of included papers; to first-hand verify the citations accuracy. Findings from feasibility study, where we reviewed 1540 articles containing 2526 citations of 14 most cited articles in which the authors were affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine University of Belgrade, were further evaluated for external confirmation in an independent verification set of articles. Verification set included 4912 citations identified in 2995 articles that cited 13 most cited articles published by authors affiliated with the Mayo Clinic Division of Nephrology and Hypertension. A citation was defined as being accurate if the cited article supported or was in accordance with the statement by citing authors. At least one inaccurate citation was found in 11 and 15% of articles in the feasibility study and verification set, respectively, suggesting that inaccurate citations are common in biomedical literature. The most common problem was the citation of nonexistent findings (38.4%), followed by an incorrect interpretation of findings (15.4%). One-fifth of inaccurate citations were due to chains of inaccurate citations. Based on these findings, several actions to reduce citation inaccuracies have been proposed.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

References

2015Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals 2021Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals 1985How accurate are quotations and references in medical journals?1987Do authors check their references? A survey of accuracy of references in three public health journals.2006Systematic Reviews on Rehabilitation Interventions 2000The accuracy of citation and quotation in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery journals 2015Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles —a systematic review and meta-analysis 2017Accuracy of cited “facts” in medical research articles: A review of study methodology and recalculation of quotation error rate

Cited by

2022Inappropriate Citation of Retracted Articles in Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Publications 2021Quotation accuracy in educational research articles 2023Burden of proof: combating inaccurate citation in biomedical literature 2024Drivers of citations in social pharmacy and practice research articles

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.