Cargando…

Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background. Quotations and references are an indispensable element of scientific communication. They should support what authors claim or provide important background information for readers. Studies indicate, however, that quotations not serving their purpose—quotation errors—may be prevalent. Meth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jergas, Hannah, Baethge, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4627914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26528420
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1364
_version_ 1782398349378322432
author Jergas, Hannah
Baethge, Christopher
author_facet Jergas, Hannah
Baethge, Christopher
author_sort Jergas, Hannah
collection PubMed
description Background. Quotations and references are an indispensable element of scientific communication. They should support what authors claim or provide important background information for readers. Studies indicate, however, that quotations not serving their purpose—quotation errors—may be prevalent. Methods. We carried out a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of quotation errors, taking account of differences between studies in error ascertainment. Results. Out of 559 studies screened we included 28 in the main analysis, and estimated major, minor and total quotation error rates of 11,9%, 95% CI [8.4, 16.6] 11.5% [8.3, 15.7], and 25.4% [19.5, 32.4]. While heterogeneity was substantial, even the lowest estimate of total quotation errors was considerable (6.7%). Indirect references accounted for less than one sixth of all quotation problems. The findings remained robust in a number of sensitivity and subgroup analyses (including risk of bias analysis) and in meta-regression. There was no indication of publication bias. Conclusions. Readers of medical journal articles should be aware of the fact that quotation errors are common. Measures against quotation errors include spot checks by editors and reviewers, correct placement of citations in the text, and declarations by authors that they have checked cited material. Future research should elucidate if and to what degree quotation errors are detrimental to scientific progress.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4627914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46279142015-11-02 Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis Jergas, Hannah Baethge, Christopher PeerJ Evidence Based Medicine Background. Quotations and references are an indispensable element of scientific communication. They should support what authors claim or provide important background information for readers. Studies indicate, however, that quotations not serving their purpose—quotation errors—may be prevalent. Methods. We carried out a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of quotation errors, taking account of differences between studies in error ascertainment. Results. Out of 559 studies screened we included 28 in the main analysis, and estimated major, minor and total quotation error rates of 11,9%, 95% CI [8.4, 16.6] 11.5% [8.3, 15.7], and 25.4% [19.5, 32.4]. While heterogeneity was substantial, even the lowest estimate of total quotation errors was considerable (6.7%). Indirect references accounted for less than one sixth of all quotation problems. The findings remained robust in a number of sensitivity and subgroup analyses (including risk of bias analysis) and in meta-regression. There was no indication of publication bias. Conclusions. Readers of medical journal articles should be aware of the fact that quotation errors are common. Measures against quotation errors include spot checks by editors and reviewers, correct placement of citations in the text, and declarations by authors that they have checked cited material. Future research should elucidate if and to what degree quotation errors are detrimental to scientific progress. PeerJ Inc. 2015-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4627914/ /pubmed/26528420 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1364 Text en © 2015 Jergas and Baethge http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Evidence Based Medicine
Jergas, Hannah
Baethge, Christopher
Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Evidence Based Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4627914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26528420
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1364
work_keys_str_mv AT jergashannah quotationaccuracyinmedicaljournalarticlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT baethgechristopher quotationaccuracyinmedicaljournalarticlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis