BACKGROUND: The instructions to authors are the only means of communication between researchers and the editorial standards of a scientific journal. One of the mandatory items to be contained therein is about the ethical part, to prevent new research to carry out abuses with the enrolled on the research are published and stimulated. AIM: To verify the ethical questions on the guidelines of Brazilian surgical journals Method: Thirteen selected journals were divided into two groups: general surgery (n=3), and surgical specialty (n=10). The instructions to authors were analyzed by the quote of ethical requirements based on a specific research protocol, ranging from zero to six points. RESULTS: The average score of the general surgery group was similar than that of the surgical specialty group (3.66±0.57 vs 3.30±1.15, p=0.6154). When each ethical requirement was compared between the groups, there was no significant difference between the ethical requirements (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: There was respect for most ethical questions evaluated, with no difference between the journals of general or specialty surgery.
BACKGROUND: The instructions to authors are the only means of communication between researchers and the editorial standards of a scientific journal. One of the mandatory items to be contained therein is about the ethical part, to prevent new research to carry out abuses with the enrolled on the research are published and stimulated. AIM: To verify the ethical questions on the guidelines of Brazilian surgical journals Method: Thirteen selected journals were divided into two groups: general surgery (n=3), and surgical specialty (n=10). The instructions to authors were analyzed by the quote of ethical requirements based on a specific research protocol, ranging from zero to six points. RESULTS: The average score of the general surgery group was similar than that of the surgical specialty group (3.66±0.57 vs 3.30±1.15, p=0.6154). When each ethical requirement was compared between the groups, there was no significant difference between the ethical requirements (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: There was respect for most ethical questions evaluated, with no difference between the journals of general or specialty surgery.
Authors: Renan Kleber Costa Teixeira; Vitor Nagai Yamaki; Thiago Barbosa Gonçalves; Nara Macedo Botelho; José Antonio Cordero da Silva Journal: Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 1.209