von Elm et al described different patterns of duplicate publication of a clinical study in the medical literature. Duplicate reports of findings can cause problems in systematic reviews, introducing bias into the analysis. The authors are from Geneva University Hospitals in Geneva, Switzerland.
Parameters:
(1) sample size
(2) reported outcome
(3) other
|
Sample Size |
Outcome |
Other |
Pattern |
|
same |
same |
|
1A |
|
same |
same |
combine >= 2 studies |
1B |
|
same |
different |
|
2 |
|
increased |
same |
|
3A |
|
decreased |
same |
|
3B |
|
increased or decreased |
different |
|
4 |
where:
• Pattern 4 could be divided into 4A and 4B to parallel 3A and 3B.
|
Pattern |
Terms Used to Describe |
|
1A |
copy (plagiarization if done by another author) |
|
1B |
(summary article?) |
|
2 |
"least publishable unit" |
|
3A |
"meat extender" (or beefing up?) |
|
3B |
disaggregation |
|
4 |
(being creative?) |
Situations where the duplication may occur include:
(1) promotional literature for a company, typically a drug or device manufacturer
(2) translation into a foreign language
(3) follow-up on a preliminary report
(4) article submitted to more than one journal simultaneously (which is considered unethical)
(5) need to justify funding support
(6) intentional unethical behavior
Situations where the duplicate publication may not be immediately obvious:
(1) change in the order of authors
(2) addition or deletion of authors
(3) change in institution
If a duplicate publication occurs, then this should be clearly stated and should be cross-referenced back to the previous work.
ICD-10: ,
