Article1990

Quotational and reference accuracy in surgical journals. A continuing peer review problem

176 citations0/0 files storedJAMA

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

Academic Writing and Publishing Publishing and Scholarly Communication scientometrics and bibliometrics research

Abstract

Fifty randomly selected references from a single monthly issue of The American Journal of Surgery; Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics; and Surgery were evaluated for citation and quotation errors. Thirteen major and 41 minor citation errors were found in the three journals. Thirty-seven major quotation errors were identified. The data support the hypothesis that authors do not check their references or may not even read them. This hypothesis may be expanded to maintain that reviewers do not check references.

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 176 citations exist upstream.

Cited by

1991The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation 2011Uses and misuses of the STROBE statement: bibliographic study 2002Association of Journal Quality Indicators With Methodological Quality of Clinical Research Articles 1997Citations and journal impact factors: questionable indicators of research quality 1998Citation rates and journal impact factors are not suitable for evaluation of research 1998Who Reviews the Reviewers? Feasibility of Using a Fictitious Manuscript to Evaluate Peer Reviewer Performance 2018Case study in major quotation errors: a critical commentary on the Newcastle–Ottawa scale 2000The accuracy of citation and quotation in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery journals

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