BACKGROUND Breaches of publication ethics such as plagiarism, data fabrication and redundant publication are recognised as forms of research misconduct that can undermine the scientific literature. We surveyed journal editors to determine their views about a range of publication ethics issues. METHODS Questionnaire sent to 524 editors-in-chief of Wiley-Blackwell science journals asking about ...

Objective. The aim of this study was to (a) determine the rate of redundant publication in the pediatrics literature and (b) to characterize these articles. Methods. Index articles in JAMA Pediatrics, Pediatrics, and the Journal of Pediatrics from 2010 were identified using PubMed. Possible redundant material from 2008 to 2012 were searched using the authors' names. Suspected duplicates were ca...

[no abstract available]

In many cases, redundant systems are beset by both independent and dependent failures. Ignoring dependent variables in MTBF evaluation of redundant systems hastens the occurrence of failure, causing it to take place before the expected time, hence decreasing safety and creating irreversible damages. Common cause failure (CCF) and cascading failure are two varieties of dependent failures, both l...

OBJECTIVES To examine the perspectives of journal editors and authors on overlapping and redundant publications in clinical research. DESIGN Pretested cross-sectional survey, containing both forced choice and open ended questions, administered by mail to the senior editors (N=99) and one randomly selected author (N=99) from all journals in the Abridged Index Medicus (1996) that published clin...

The peer review process is a quality control for scientific publication. Well done, it helps editors to improve their journals and protects readers from wasting time on ill-conceived, redundant, irrelevant or erroneous literature. Badly done it can act as an obstacle to innovation. This article tells you how to be a first rate peer reviewer.