Standards for ethical publication.

It is essential that authors involved in biomedical publication be aware of basic guidelines for the ethical publication of their scientific work. The undersigned editors have taken a consortium approach to a concern facing several major journals that relates to duplicate publication. We aim to maintain the integrity of our scientific journals. Reports that claim original information must contain original information. We believe the priority placed on this tenet is appropriately reflective of its importance to patient care.

Authors are ethically obligated to be sure that data are presented accurately and in a fair and unbiased way. The supporting data for any scientific investigation should be maintained in your office files for a minimum of 5 to 7 years after publication. (This is dependent on the study and the governing agency. Some institutions require less, particularly for retrospective data.) Scientific data should never be altered or deleted. In this era of modern computer science, authors must also be careful that photos and other illustrations when enhanced or otherwise "touched up" do not mislead readers or distort information. Digital enhancement of pictures that might be interpreted as intending to adjust or enhance findings or that could otherwise potentially mislead the reader is considered a major ethical breach.

Scientific data may not be published twice without clear notification to the editor-in-chief, reviewing editor, editorial staff, and the readership of the journal that these data have been published previously. Duplicate submission or redundant publication of a similar data set is considered unethical. (1-8) "Duplicate submission" occurs when an author submits a manuscript simultaneously to two or more journals. This is inappropriate unless the journal editors have decided in advance that redundant publication would be in the best interest of the public's health. "Redundant publication" is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published in print or electronic media. The overlap may be in data, content, or both, but commentary as written still seems to emphasize data.

The fundamental issue with redundant publication is that it violates the trust placed by readers of a journal that content is original unless there is a clear statement to the contrary. It is the senior/corresponding author's responsibility to vet all manuscript data and identify redundant content in advance of submission. When submitting a manuscript, the author should fully disclose to the editor any duplicate submissions or previous publications that could potentially be considered redundant. It is not the responsibility of the editor or manuscript referees to check every reference or search the literature for undisclosed redundancy; the due diligence is the responsibility of the lead author. Also, "preliminary reporting" can violate journal policies if the author leaks data or original research to the media, industry, or government before publication. This should not necessarily jeopardize publication but should be discussed up front with the editor and a mutually acceptable approach agreed upon in advance.

Publication of duplicate or redundant data or content in journals of different disciplines or different languages is a violation of this principle. Rehash of an old data set into a new publication is similarly redundant. If ever an author has questions on the interpretation of redundant or duplicate publication, it is his/her responsibility to bring the question to the attention of the editor-in-chief prior to the review or publication of the manuscript. Full disclosure will prevent violation of this principle.

The undersigned editors agree that if an author is found by one of the editors to have violated the foregoing standards for ethical publication of scientific work, that editor will share with the other editors the name of the author and details of the violation. Each editor will then independently determine what sanction, if any, he or she will impose on the author with respect to future publication in the journal. When indicated, other actions may also be independently undertaken by the respective editors, including but not limited to, notification of the dean, department chair, or chair of the scientific integrity committee at the author's institution.

This editorial expresses the latest policy of the undersigned editors and clarifies and amends the policy previously set forth in May 2005. (9) This editorial is being published simultaneously in each of the represented journals to emphasize the importance of this principle and maximize its accessibility to the community of authors who publish in these journals. These principles were developed and supported by the undersigned but are not meant to be restrictive to these journals. We invite other editors of journals in our field to participate in this policy.

References

(1.) Kassirer JP, Angell M. Redundant publication: A reminder. N Engl J Med 1995;333:449-50.

(2.) Doherty M. The misconduct of redundant publication. Ann Rheum Dis 1996;55:783-5.

(3.) Huston P, Moher D. Redundancy, disaggregation, and the integrity of medical research. Lancet 1996;347:1024-6.

(4.) Huth EJ. Repetitive and divided publication. In: Hudson Jones A, McLellan F, eds. Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2000:112-36.

(5.) Schein M, Paladugu R. Redundant surgical publications: Tip of the iceberg? Surgery 2001;129:655-61.

(6.) Bailey BJ. Duplicate publication in the field of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;126: 211-16.

(7.) Jackler RK. Policy on redundant publication. Otol Neurotol 2003;24:131.

(8.) International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. February 2006. http://www.icmje.org/#over.

(9.) Benninger MS, Jackler RK, Johnson JT, et al. Consortium of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery journals to collaborate in maintenance of high ethical standards. Head Neck 2005;27: 351-2.

Jonas T. Johnson, MD

Editor-in-Chief

THE LARYNGOSCOPE

John K. Niparko, MD

Editor-in-Chief

OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY

Paul A. Levine, MD

Editor

ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGYHEAD

& NECK SURGERY

David W. Kennedy, MD

Editor-in-Chief

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RHINOLOGY 

Susan E Rudy, MSN, CRNP, CORLN

Editor-in-Chief

ORE-HEAD AND NECK NURSING

Peter C. Weber, MD

Editor

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY

Randal S. Weber, MD

Editor

HEAD & NECK

Michael S. Benninger, MD

Past Editor-in-Chief

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY

Richard M. Rosenfeld, MD, MPH

Editor-in-Chief

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY

Robert J. Ruben, MD

Editor-in-Chief

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC 

OTORttINOLARYNGOLOGY

Richard J.H. Smith, MD

Editor-in-Chief

ANNALS OF OTOLOGY, RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY 

Robert Thayer Sataloff, MD, DMA 

Editor-in-Chief

EAR, NOSE & THROAT JOURNAL and JOURNAL OF VOICE

Neil Weir, MA, FRCS 

Editor Emeritus

THE JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY & OTOLOGY