CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Academic Writing and Publishingscientometrics and bibliometrics researchPublishing and Scholarly Communication

Reference accuracy in four rehabilitation journals

Unver, Bayram, Senduran, Meric, Unver Kocak, Fatma, Gunal, Izge, Karatosun, Vasfi·2009·Clinical Rehabilitation
DOI 10.1177/0269215508102968
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To investigate the incidence of reference errors in major peer-reviewed general physical therapy and rehabilitation journals (American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AJPMR), Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (APMR), Clinical Rehabilitation (CR) and Physical Therapy (PT)). Design Descriptive, comparative. Main outcome measures All issues of the AJPMR, APMR, CR and PT between 2003 and 2007 were studied. For each journal, references from articles were consecutively numbered, and using a random number generator, 100 references were selected from each journal. For each reference, ease of retrieval on MEDLINE and the presence of citation errors were noted. If discrepancies were identified, the reference was compared with the original publication. Two observers independently evaluated each reference for citation errors. Results The total number of citations with errors among all published journals was 123 (30.7%). The reference error rates by journal ranged from 23% to 44%. Most errors (48.0%) occurred in the author element, followed by the title (31.7%), journal (8.9%), page (5.7%), year (4.1%), and volume (1.6%). Only 8 (2%) were likely to make retrieval of the reference difficult. Conclusions Errors in references still appear in current physical therapy and rehabilitation literature, but most are not severe.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0269215508102968

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Historically, the distinction between major and minor errors in reference accuracy research is related to the difficulty of locating a reference.

    “Historically, the distinction between major and minor errors is related to the difficulty to locate a reference (Reddy et al., 2008;Roach et al., 1997;Unver et al., 2009).”

    From Reference accuracy of primary studies published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as Unver et al., 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Unver, B., Senduran, M., Unver Kocak, F., Gunal, I., & Karatosun, V.
Affiliations
  • School of Physiotherapy, Dokuz Eylül University,
  • School of Physiotherapy, Dokuz Eylül University
  • School of Sports Sciences and Technology, Pamukkale University, Denizli
  • Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir, Turkey
Venue
Clinical Rehabilitation
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-05-29
Volume
23
Issue
8
Pages
741-745
ISSN
  • 0269-2155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0873
DOI
10.1177/0269215508102968
OpenAlex
W2160804895
Cited by
21
References
13
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
25.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Clinical Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
Keywords
citation errors, bibliographic references, physical therapy journals, rehabilitation journals, citation accuracy, author name errors
MeSH terms
Bibliographies as Topic, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy Specialty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review