Nigeria Journal of Paediatrics 2011; 38(1):1-3

COMMENTARY

Bede C. Ibe.

Duplicate and Redundant Publications

What Authors and Editors need to know?

Received:13th January 2011

Abstract:

In the course of

And are a boost to industry and for

Accepted: 17th January 2011

assessing publications for

academic staff in universities, such

academic promotions over the

publications are an essential

BC Ibe ( )

years, one has come across

requirement for gaining tenure

Department of Paediatrics

severally papers by the same

and/or promotion in their jobs- the

University of Nigeria Teaching

author(s) which overlap very

so called “public or perish

Hospital Enugu.

significantly and should not have

phenomenon”

Email profbedeibe@yahoo.com

been presented as different

The “public or perish phenomenon”

Tel +2348037740658

publications. It is understandable

puts intense pressure on academics

that academics and researchers in

to publish because quantity (and not

institutions of higher learning,

research institutes or industry

necessarily quality) gives great

desire to have their research

advantage. The undesirable

findings disseminated in the form

consequences of this phenomenon

of publications in peer-reviewed

are duplicate and redundant

journals. Such publications give

publications.

immense exposure to the authors

What are Duplicate and Redundant

body of the paper from the original paper but the data

publications?

are same. The differences often come in the forms of

different interpretation of data or an introduction

A duplicate publication is an article that overlaps

from a slightly different angle.

substantially with another manuscript; although the

The defining factors in duplicate and /or redundant

texts are rarely the same, 1-3 other names used to

publication is lack of cross reference. The editor of

describe the practice are dual, repetitive,

the journals the papers submitted do not have

disaggregated or fragmented publications. 4,5

knowledge of the existence of either publication. The

Redundant publication, of which duplicate

authors present the paper as different works and what

publications is a subset, is define by the committee on

them read as much.

publication Ethics (COPE) in their guideline on Good

Generating more then one manuscript from a single

publication practice “…as when two or more papers,

data set may be legitimate in some instance provided

without full cross reference, share the same

that they are cross-referenced and each manuscript

hypothesis, data, discussion points or conclusions” 6

addresses a distinct question.” Salami Science” refers

In duplicate publication, the papers usually differ

to the slicing of a data set in to several pieces called

only slightly in changes to the title, abstract

least publishable units. 5 The quality of such units is

(summary) and/or order of authors. The text is usually

often questionable.

identical or nearly so. In redundant publication, there

is usually a somewhat different textual slant in the

2

Duplicate publication may be picked during peer

published in journal is expected to carry a message. If

review of manuscripts if the journals are fully indexed

the message is re-cycle, it is of little or no use.

using search engines like PubMed. In resource-poor

Duplicate and redundant publications also waste the

settings and especially with local or institutional

time and limited resources of editorial and peer-

journals which may not be indexed, duplicate

review system.

publications may be missed entirely.

Duplicate or redundant publication is entirely

How

to

avoid

duplicate

and/redundant

different from plagiarism or copy-right violation

publication.

which refers to unauthorized publication of someone

else's work and claiming same one's original work.

To avoid duplicate or redundant publication, authors

While duplicate or redundant publication could be

need to i) be aware of the practice, ii) appreciate that

described as a misdemeanor, plagiarism is a serious

the practice is wrong and iii) be open with editors

academic fraud.

when submitting manuscripts for publication

especially when in doubt of possible overlap of

Why duplicate and/or redundant publications

papers submitted either to same or different journal.

occur.

Editors of journals on their part must be clear in their

instructions to authors on policies on duplicate and /or

Authors often give several answers when confronted

redundant publications. Editors should insist that all

with allegations of duplicate and/or redundant

authors listed in manuscripts submitted for

publication. “We did not know the overlap was

publication sign, acknowledging authorship. It is not

significant”, The other paper was for a different

unknown for some authors to claim ignorance of

audience”, “We did not know that this other similar

manuscripts in which they are listed as co-authors.

answers. One answer that is almost never

Editors also must avoid undue delayed in handing

acknowledged is “We want to improve on our CV”.

manuscripts. Editorial decision on submitted

As stated earlier, academic productivity is measured

manuscripts should be done with dispatch as delays

most often in numbers of publications. Quality is

are often cited as reason for submission of same

usually secondary.

manuscript to more than one journal.

Why duplicate/redundant publications are bad

and should be discouraged.

Conclusion

There are three reasons why duplicate and redundant

In this era evidence- based medicine, the medical

publications are bad and should be discouraged.

profession depends on published literature to

Firstly and most important, they have the potential to

determine best practices, everyone, therefore,

skew evidence. When two or more papers, not cross-

researchers as well as practitioners have vested

referenced, are published from the same dataset, and

interest in the integrity of published literature, Editors

are read as different studies, they will be assumed to

of medical journals have the onerous responsibility of

be strong. They can affect the outcomes of meta-

ensuring that all papers published in their journals

satisfy the highest standards of scientific integrity .

8

analyses which are used to establish best practices.

This was demonstrated in the study by Tramer etal. 7

Journals provide the forum for sharing of information

and can have far-reaching consequences.

within the academic community and this makes for

Secondly, they can impugn a journal's reputation.

progress. While authors need the visibility and the

When one reads a research report in a journal, one

academic points which publications in journals

wants an assurance that what is being read is original

provide, they (authors) must at all times consider the

and contains some (unique) information. Duplicate

greater interest of the larger society. Editors and

publications when found out destroy this trust and this

reviewers have limited capacity to pick up duplicate,

redundant or even plagiarized papers so that,

is not good for the journal.

ultimately, the integrity of any published paper rests

Third, duplicate and/or redundant publications

with the individual author . Authors guarantee the

9

“waste” journal space which is very competitive in

integrity of scientific literature. We must hold

academic and scientific publishing. Every paper

ourselves accountable.

3

References

1.

Huth EJ. Repetitive and

4 .

H u s t o n

P,

M o h e r

D .

divided publication. In:

7. Tramer MR, Reynolds DJM,

Redundancy, disaggregation,

Ethical Issues in Biomedical

More RA et.al. Impact of

and the integrity of medical

Publication. Hudson Jones A,

convert duplicate publication

research. Lancet. 1996;

on meta-analysis: a case

Mclellan F (Eds). Baltimore,

347:1024.

study. Br. Med. J. 1997; 315:

the John Hopkins University

5.

Tobin MJ, AJRCCM'S Policy

635.

Press.2000.P. 112 136.

on Duplicate Publication. Am.

8.

Bailar JI,Angell M, Boots S,

2 .

B l o c k A J ,

D u p l i c a t e

J. Resp. & Crit. Care Med.

et.al. Ethics and policy in

Publication. Chest 1998; 114

2002; 166:433.

scientific

publication.

951.

6. Committee on Publication

Bethesda, MD: Council

of

3.

Britton J, KnoxAJ. Duplicate

Ethics (COPE). Guidelines on

Biology Editors; 1990. P.25

Publications, redundant

Good publication Practice.

9. Caelleigh AS. Role of the

publication, and disclosure of

2002.

journal editor in sustaining

closely related publications

htt://www.publicationethics.o

the integrity in research.

Thorax. 1999; 54: 378.

rg.uk/cope2002/pdf2002/213

Acad. Med. 1993; 68: S23

30pp4852.pdf.

S29.