The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications

ABSTRACT Inaccurate data in scientific papers can result from honest error or intentional falsification. This study attempted to determine the percentage of published papers that contain inappropriate image duplication, a specific type of inaccurate data. The images from a total of 20,621 papers pub...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Elisabeth M. Bik, Arturo Casadevall, Ferric C. Fang
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	American Society for Microbiology 2016
Materias:	Microbiology QR1-502
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f9d94a4a03b24ad6a9aade759c249651
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f9d94a4a03b24ad6a9aade759c249651
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f9d94a4a03b24ad6a9aade759c2496512021-11-15T15:50:17ZThe Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications10.1128/mBio.00809-162150-7511https://doaj.org/article/f9d94a4a03b24ad6a9aade759c2496512016-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.00809-16https://doaj.org/toc/2150-7511ABSTRACT Inaccurate data in scientific papers can result from honest error or intentional falsification. This study attempted to determine the percentage of published papers that contain inappropriate image duplication, a specific type of inaccurate data. The images from a total of 20,621 papers published in 40 scientific journals from 1995 to 2014 were visually screened. Overall, 3.8% of published papers contained problematic figures, with at least half exhibiting features suggestive of deliberate manipulation. The prevalence of papers with problematic images has risen markedly during the past decade. Additional papers written by authors of papers with problematic images had an increased likelihood of containing problematic images as well. As this analysis focused only on one type of data, it is likely that the actual prevalence of inaccurate data in the published literature is higher. The marked variation in the frequency of problematic images among journals suggests that journal practices, such as prepublication image screening, influence the quality of the scientific literature.Elisabeth M. BikArturo CasadevallFerric C. FangAmerican Society for MicrobiologyarticleMicrobiologyQR1-502ENmBio, Vol 7, Iss 3 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Microbiology QR1-502
spellingShingle	Microbiology QR1-502 Elisabeth M. Bik Arturo Casadevall Ferric C. Fang The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
description	ABSTRACT Inaccurate data in scientific papers can result from honest error or intentional falsification. This study attempted to determine the percentage of published papers that contain inappropriate image duplication, a specific type of inaccurate data. The images from a total of 20,621 papers published in 40 scientific journals from 1995 to 2014 were visually screened. Overall, 3.8% of published papers contained problematic figures, with at least half exhibiting features suggestive of deliberate manipulation. The prevalence of papers with problematic images has risen markedly during the past decade. Additional papers written by authors of papers with problematic images had an increased likelihood of containing problematic images as well. As this analysis focused only on one type of data, it is likely that the actual prevalence of inaccurate data in the published literature is higher. The marked variation in the frequency of problematic images among journals suggests that journal practices, such as prepublication image screening, influence the quality of the scientific literature.
format	article
author	Elisabeth M. Bik Arturo Casadevall Ferric C. Fang
author_facet	Elisabeth M. Bik Arturo Casadevall Ferric C. Fang
author_sort	Elisabeth M. Bik
title	The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
title_short	The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
title_full	The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
title_fullStr	The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
title_full_unstemmed	The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
title_sort	prevalence of inappropriate image duplication in biomedical research publications
publisher	American Society for Microbiology
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/f9d94a4a03b24ad6a9aade759c249651
work_keys_str_mv	AT elisabethmbik theprevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications AT arturocasadevall theprevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications AT ferriccfang theprevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications AT elisabethmbik prevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications AT arturocasadevall prevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications AT ferriccfang prevalenceofinappropriateimageduplicationinbiomedicalresearchpublications
_version_	1718427437297041408

The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications

Ejemplares similares