A high rate of errors of citation and quotation has been reported in the publications of many medical specialties. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of citation and quotation errors in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery journals. A retrospective analysis was performed based on the first issue for 1997 of each of four journals: Laryngoscope; Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology; Clinical Otolaryngyology; and Journal of Laryngology and Otology. A sample of 50 references from each journal was randomly selected and each was checked for accuracy against the original referenced paper. Citation errors were categorized as major, intermediate or minor and quotation errors as major or minor. Citation errors occurred in 37.5% of the references, 11.9% of which were considered major errors. Quotation errors occurred in 17%, with 11.1% major errors. This prevalence is similar to the established error rate in medical literature.

The accuracy of citation and quotation in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery journals.

Risk factors for citation errors in peer-reviewed nursing journals



Background. Citation errors are common among nursing journals. But, there are no data regarding the factors that predispose to these errors.



Objective. To determine the risk factors that predispose to citation error in peer- reviewed nursing journals.



Methods. Five hundred and fifty references were selected randomly from articles published in eleven nursing journals for the year 1998. The incidences of major and minor citation errors were determined by comparing with the original articles. The relative odds of citation errors for the number of authors, collaborating institutions and the length of the reference list were calculated. The correlation between the scientific quality of the journal (by means of journal impact factor and immediacy index) and the incidence of citation error were also determined.



Results. The incidence of citation errors is comparable to those reported previously. Long reference lists in articles written by a single author predicted strongly the occurrence of minor citation errors. Journals with a high impact factor and immediacy index tend to contain fewer minor mistakes. None of these factors affect the incidence of major errors.



Conclusion. Contributors to journals should be aware of the various risk factors for citation errors. Citation accuracy may be improved by modifying these factors.

Risk factors for citation errors in peer-reviewed nursing journals.

Accuracy of references in five biomedical informatics journals.

Referencing and quotation accuracy in four manual therapy journals.

Background
Most journals try to improve their articles by technical editing processes such as proof-reading, editing to conform to 'house styles', grammatical conventions and checking accuracy of cited references. Despite the considerable resources devoted to technical editing, we do not know whether it improves the accessibility of biomedical research findings or the utility of articles. This is an update of a Cochrane methodology review first published in 2003.

Objectives
To assess the effects of technical editing on research reports in peer-reviewed biomedical journals, and to assess the level of accuracy of references to these reports.

Search methods
We searched The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007; MEDLINE (last searched July 2006); EMBASE (last searched June 2007) and checked relevant articles for further references. We also searched the Internet and contacted researchers and experts in the field.

Selection criteria
Prospective or retrospective comparative studies of technical editing processes applied to original research articles in biomedical journals, as well as studies of reference accuracy.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed each study against the selection criteria and assessed the methodological quality of each study. One review author extracted the data, and the second review author repeated this.

Main results
We located 32 studies addressing technical editing and 66 surveys of reference accuracy. Only three of the studies were randomised controlled trials. 

A 'package' of largely unspecified editorial processes applied between acceptance and publication was associated with improved readability in two studies and improved reporting quality in another two studies, while another study showed mixed results after stricter editorial policies were introduced. More intensive editorial processes were associated with fewer errors in abstracts and references. Providing instructions to authors was associated with improved reporting of ethics requirements in one study and fewer errors in references in two studies, but no difference was seen in the quality of abstracts in one randomised controlled trial. Structuring generally improved the quality of abstracts, but increased their length. The reference accuracy studies showed a median citation error rate of 38% and a median quotation error rate of 20%.

Authors' conclusions
Surprisingly few studies have evaluated the effects of technical editing rigorously. However there is some evidence that the 'package' of technical editing used by biomedical journals does improve papers. A substantial number of references in biomedical articles are cited or quoted inaccurately.

Technical editing of research reports in biomedical journals

Background: The accuracy of reference citations in The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery was evaluated All of the references from 1995 (Volume 65) were included (n= 4092)



Methods: A sample of 100 references was randomly selected and examined in detail by comparison with the original references



Results: Overall, 60% of citations contained errors Errors were categorized by dividing references into six elements A total of 388% of citations contained an error in one element, 156% contained errors in two elements, 44% contained errors in three elements, and 44% contained errors in four elements of the reference The most common errors were errors of authors' names and errors in the title



Conclusions: Contributors to this journal should take more care in checking references in their manuscripts before publication

Roach Vj

Papers

How accurate are references in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery