Salami Slicing of Data Sets: What the Young Researcher Needs to Know

A Year On: The Changes We Introduced and the Common Mistakes Encountered

“…This differs from the splitting of data from a single research which may be legitimately carried out in certain situations. [1] Editors are more interested in hypothesis-driven than data-driven works. While exploratory analyses certainly have their place in medicine and biomedical research, they should be included in the main paper itself and do not deserve publication as a separate paper Review critically : For review articles, we expect the subject to be topical and the authors to have added their own critical observations and synthesis of the literature.…”

“Salami Science” Ou “Salami Slicing”: Uma Reflexão Sobre a Produção Científica

“…O autoplágio geralmente é realizado com o propósito de aumentar o número de publicações e, deste modo, obter vantagens quer sejam monetárias ou acadêmicas 5,7,8 . Como o elevado número de publicações muitas vezes tem sido um critério importante para admissão na carreira acadêmica, progressão funcional ou mesmo ganho de bolsa de produtividade ou edital de financiamento de novas pesquisas, essa prática tem sido mundialmente evidenciada [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] . Além de ser antiética, é também condenável por fazer com que editores percam tempo em jugar artigos que não acrescentam novas evidências, ocupam o espaço de contribuições que poderiam ser inovadoras, aumentam deslealmente a concorrência para publicação em periódicos científicos, além de dificultar a identificação de textos que tragam informações substanciais para o avanço do conhecimento cientifico.…”

Salami publishing: Walking on thin (sl)ice

“…Also, the visibility and reach of the research project may end up getting diluted as some papers may have gotten published in journals of other disciplines which ones' peers may not necessarily read or in journals with lesser circulation and visibility or even in journals with lower impact factors. Furthermore, as Menon and Muraleedharan have pointed out,[ 3 ] valuable conclusions, that could have been derived if the data were presented as a whole, are missed as a result of this fragmentation, and the entire exercise in fact contribute to stall scientific advancement. Instead, what we gain is merely incremental or repetitive findings that are at best, of limited value, and worse, it could even end up distorting scientific literature.…”

“…Instead, what we gain is merely incremental or repetitive findings that are at best, of limited value, and worse, it could even end up distorting scientific literature. [ 3 ]…”

“…These hypotheses must have been framed a priori and not after the data have been collected. [ 3 ] However, who is to say where the lines must be drawn and who is to be the judge of what is right and what is wrong?…”