Importance, Errors, and Patterns of Quotations to Psychiatric Original Articles

Abstract

Introduction A substantial rate of quotation errors has been reported in medical journal publications: about 25% of all quotations are wrong. It is, however, entirely unclear how important quotation errors are for the message of quoting articles. Methods This is a case study in form of a retrospective quotation analysis of a cohort of 72 psychiatric original articles (index articles) from 5 German-language general psychiatric journals. Main outcomes were importance and accuracy of quotations from the 2 calendar years following the publication of index articles. Results Fifty-one index articles were quoted 235 times in 109 quoting articles. Almost all quotations were of medium (76% [95% CI: 70%; 81%]) or high (20% [15%, 25%]) importance for the message of the quoting paper. Regarding quotation accuracy, 44 quotations (19% [14%; 24%]) were rated as minor, and 51 (22% [17%; 27%]) as major errors. In multivariable analyses, no statistically significant and practically relevant factors associated with quotation inaccuracy emerged, such as self-quotation, impact factor of the quoting journal, or importance. Among quoting articles, 7 (6% [3%; 13%]) showed a pattern of predominantly quoting index articles from the time span relevant to the calculation of the impact factor. Discussion Quotations are important for the message of the quoting paper. Therefore, quotation errors may be detrimental to scientific reasoning and may undermine public trust in medical science. The present investigation is a case study, and its results are exploratory. While it is plausible that the findings translate into other environments, independent replication is needed.

Le mésusage des citations et ses conséquences en médecine

“…Pour identifier des études postérieures à ces deux revues systématiques, nous avons examiné toutes les publications les citant, soit 26 articles distincts. Seuls cinq d'entre eux apportent de nouvelles observations concernant les distorsions de citation en biomédecine [8,[13][14][15][16]. Le premier article a analysé 300 citations extraites de huit journaux spécialisés en chirurgie et a détecté 6 % de distorsions majeures [13].…”

“…Le premier article a analysé 300 citations extraites de huit journaux spécialisés en chirurgie et a détecté 6 % de distorsions majeures [13]. Dans le second article, ce pourcentage atteignait 22 % pour 235 citations faisant référence à 51 articles parus dans des revues de psychiatrie en langue allemande [14]. L'analyse réalisée dans le troisième article portait sur 250 citations prises au hasard dans cinq revues prestigieuses à facteurs d'impact élevés ou très élevés (Science Advances, Nature Communication, the 1984 de six journaux biomédicaux : British Medical Journal, The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, Clinical Radiology, British Journal of Surgery et British Journal of Hospital Medicine.…”

On a Very Basic Behavior in Science: Importance and Issues with Quotations

“…At some point, it is worth taking a broader look at what we are doing in psychiatry or in medicine in general. That is why, in this issue, we are publishing a study by Christopher Baethge [1] that typically may not fit into the scope of Pharmacopsychiatry. As a psychiatrist and an editor, Baethge carried out an investigation in an underresearched area: the accuracy and significance of citations in psychiatric journals.…”

“…Baethge's study [1] contains interesting data and examples, e. g., on associations of quotation errors with group citations or impact factor of quoting journals, and -like in many studies in this field -there is no denying a certain subjectivity of the assessment and also that the sample is not strictly representative for all of psychiatry. Nevertheless, this is a very careful and laborious analysis, a case study in the words of the author, and its main conclusions appear unmistakable: quotation errors are not a quantité negligeable-not in their numbers and not in their meaning and significance.…”