V P Mathur1, J K Dhillon, G Kalra, A Sharma, R Mathur. 1. Division of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Centre for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Publication can become a symbol of presenting how meticulously a person has followed ethical principles in research. It is the duty of the investigators or authors to carefully read the instructions to authors and generate data with honesty and genuineness. In fulfillment of the basic requisite to publish, clearly defined instructions to authors should be provided by the journal. AIMS: To assess the pattern of instructions regarding the ethical requirements given to authors in Indian Dental Journals and tried to compare the same with British Dental Journals. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey of 'instructions for authors,' for analysis of guidelines on ethical processes, was done. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Instructions to authors of Indian and British Dental Journals indexed in PubMed were reviewed for guidelines with regard to seven key ethical issues. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Descriptive statistics were used and results were expressed in percentages as well as numbers. RESULTS: Of the 10 Indian Dental Journals, 7 (70%) cited ethical guidelines such as International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Committee on Publication Ethics, Indian Council of Medical Research guidelines whereas out of 27 British Dental Journals, 16 (59.25%) cited these. Protection of human subjects such as approval from an institutional/independent ethics committee, obtaining informed consent and maintenance of confidentiality of patient records was covered with 8 (80%) Indian and 19 (70.3%) British Dental Journals. Four (40%) Indian and 13 (48.1%) instructed about animals welfare. Nine (90%) of the Indian and 25 (92.5%) British Dental Journals required declaration of conflicts of interest by authors. Publication issues and authorship/contributorship criteria were specified by all 10 Indian and 25 (92.5%) and 24 (88.8%) British journals respectively. 6 (60%) of Indian and 11 (40.75%) of British Journals explained about data management, in case of clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of Indexed Indian and British Dental Journals did not provide adequate instructions to authors regarding ethical issues.
BACKGROUND: Publication can become a symbol of presenting how meticulously a person has followed ethical principles in research. It is the duty of the investigators or authors to carefully read the instructions to authors and generate data with honesty and genuineness. In fulfillment of the basic requisite to publish, clearly defined instructions to authors should be provided by the journal. AIMS: To assess the pattern of instructions regarding the ethical requirements given to authors in Indian Dental Journals and tried to compare the same with British Dental Journals. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey of 'instructions for authors,' for analysis of guidelines on ethical processes, was done. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Instructions to authors of Indian and British Dental Journals indexed in PubMed were reviewed for guidelines with regard to seven key ethical issues. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Descriptive statistics were used and results were expressed in percentages as well as numbers. RESULTS: Of the 10 Indian Dental Journals, 7 (70%) cited ethical guidelines such as International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Committee on Publication Ethics, Indian Council of Medical Research guidelines whereas out of 27 British Dental Journals, 16 (59.25%) cited these. Protection of human subjects such as approval from an institutional/independent ethics committee, obtaining informed consent and maintenance of confidentiality of patient records was covered with 8 (80%) Indian and 19 (70.3%) British Dental Journals. Four (40%) Indian and 13 (48.1%) instructed about animals welfare. Nine (90%) of the Indian and 25 (92.5%) British Dental Journals required declaration of conflicts of interest by authors. Publication issues and authorship/contributorship criteria were specified by all 10 Indian and 25 (92.5%) and 24 (88.8%) British journals respectively. 6 (60%) of Indian and 11 (40.75%) of British Journals explained about data management, in case of clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of Indexed Indian and British Dental Journals did not provide adequate instructions to authors regarding ethical issues.