Skip Navigation


Bioinformatics Advance Access originally published online on December 1, 2007
Bioinformatics 2008 24(2):243-249; doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm574
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (Print PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
24/2/243    most recent
btm574v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Errami, M.
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Errami, M.
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2007 The Author(s)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Déjà vu—A study of duplicate citations in Medline

Mounir Errami 1, Justin M. Hicks 1, Wayne Fisher 1, David Trusty 1, Jonathan D. Wren 2, Tara C. Long 1 and Harold R. Garner 1,*

1UT Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas TX 75390-9185 and 2Arthritis and Immunology Research Program, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation, 825 N.E. 13th Street, Oklahoma City OK 73104

*To whom correspondence should be addressed.


  Abstract

Motivation: Duplicate publication impacts the quality of the scientific corpus, has been difficult to detect, and studies this far have been limited in scope and size. Using text similarity searches, we were able to identify signatures of duplicate citations among a body of abstracts.

Results: A sample of 62 213 Medline citations was examined and a database of manually verified duplicate citations was created to study author publication behavior. We found that 0.04% of the citations with no shared authors were highly similar and are thus potential cases of plagiarism. 1.35% with shared authors were sufficiently similar to be considered a duplicate. Extrapolating, this would correspond to 3500 and 117 500 duplicate citations in total, respectively.

Availability: eTBLAST, an automated citation matching tool, and Déjà vu, the duplicate citation database, are freely available at http://invention.swmed.edu/ and http://spore.swmed.edu/dejavu

Contact: harold.garner{at}utsouthwestern.edu

Associate Editor: Alfonso Valencia

Received on September 20, 2007; revised on November 14, 2007; accepted on November 15, 2007

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
M. Errami, Z. Sun, T. C. Long, A. C. George, and H. R. Garner
Deja vu: a database of highly similar citations in the scientific literature
Nucleic Acids Res., September 8, 2008; (2008) gkn546v2.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
J. D. Wren
URL decay in MEDLINE--a 4-year follow-up study
Bioinformatics, June 1, 2008; 24(11): 1381 - 1385.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.