CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Academic Writing and Publishingscientometrics and bibliometrics researchPublishing and Scholarly Communication

Accuracy of references and quotations in veterinary journals

Open access
Hinchcliff, K. W., Bruce, N. J., Powers, J. D., Kipp, M. L.·1993·Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
DOI 10.2460/javma.1993.202.03.397
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Summary: The accuracy of references and quotations used to substantiate statements of fact in articles published in 6 frequently cited veterinary journals was examined. Three hundred references were randomly selected, and the accuracy of each citation was examined. A subset of 100 references was examined for quotational accuracy; ie, the accuracy with which authors represented the work or assertions of the author being cited. Of the 300 references selected, 295 were located, and 125 major errors were found in 88 (29.8%) of them. Sixty-seven (53.6%) major errors were found involving authors, 12 (9.6%) involved the article title, 14 (11.2%) involved the book or journal title, and 32 (25.6%) involved the volume number, date, or page numbers. Sixty-eight minor errors were detected. The accuracy of 111 quotations from 95 citations in 65 articles was examined. Nine quotations were technical and not classified, 86 (84.3%) were classified as correct, 2 (1.9%) contained minor misquotations, and 14 (13.7%) contained major misquotations. We concluded that misquotations and errors in citations occur frequently in veterinary journals, but at a rate similar to that reported for other biomedical journals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2460/javma.1993.202.03.397

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In Hinchcliff et al. (1993), 29.8% of verified references in six veterinary medicine journals contained at least one error.

    “Unclear 29.8% (error rate only reported for major errors)”

    From Reference accuracy of primary studies published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as Hinchcliff et al. (1993)

    The Summary (p. 1) reports that 88 of 295 located references (29.8%) contained major errors across six veterinary journals. It separately reports 68 minor errors, so 29.8% is the rate for references with at least one major error, not an established rate for references with any error. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • A similar picture emerges from studies in marine biology, geography, and veterinary medicine.

    “A similar picture emerges from studies in the fields of marine biology (Todd et al., 2010), geography (Haussmann et al., 2013), and veterinary medicine (Hinchcliff et al., 1993).”

    From Quotation accuracy in medical journal articles—a systematic review and meta-analysis (2015) · cites this paper as Hinchcliff et al., 1993

  • A reference list serves as a roadmap for how scholarship about a topic develops over time.

    “A reference list also serves as a roadmap for how scholarship about a topic develops over time (Hinchcliff et al., 1993;White, 1987a).”

    From Reference accuracy of primary studies published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as Hinchcliff et al., 1993

  • One of the most basic functions of a reference list is to give credit for the work of other authors.

    “One of the most basic functions of a reference list is to give credit for the work of other authors (George and Robbins, 1994;Hinchcliff et al., 1993;Oermann et al., 2001;Taylor, 1998).”

    From Reference accuracy of primary studies published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as Hinchcliff et al., 1993

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. [2]2. Garfield E. Cited by: Kronick D. The literature of the life sciences. Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1985;93.
  2. [1]1. Day RA. How to write and publish a scientific paper. 3rd ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1988;49.
  3. [3]3. On being a scientist. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989:16.
  4. [5]5. de Lacey G, Record C, Wade J. How accurate are quotations and references in medical journals? Br Med J 1985; 291:884-886.
  5. [4]4. Lawani SM, Bayer AE. Validity of citation criteria for assessing the influence of scientific publications: new evidence with peer assessment. J Am Soc Inf Sci 1983;34:59-66.
  6. [6]6. Evans JT, Nadjari HI, Burchell SA. Quotational and reference accuracy in surgical journals: a continuing peer review problem. JAMA 1990;263:1353-1354.
  7. [8]8. Garfield E. SCI Journal citation reports; a bibliometric analysis of science journals in the ISI Data Base. Science citation index 1988 Annual 1989;19:43-80.
  8. [7]7. Hinchcliff KW. Accuracy of references (letter). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1991;198:11-12.
  9. [11]11. International committee of medical journal editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med 1988;108:258-265.
  10. [10]10. Roland CG. Thoughts about medical writing XXXVII. Verify your references. Anesth Analg 1976;55:717-718.
  11. [12]12. Key JD, Roland CG. Reference accuracy in articles accepted for publication in the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1977;58:136-137.
  12. [13]13. Lichter PR. Checking citations. Ophthalmology 1989; 96:1131-1132.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hinchcliff, K. W., Bruce, N. J., Powers, J. D., & Kipp, M. L.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
ORCID
Hinchcliff, K. W.
Venue
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Publisher
American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)
Published
1993-02-01
Volume
202
Issue
3
Pages
397-400
ISSN
0003-1488 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2460/javma.1993.202.03.397
OpenAlex
W2416436976
Cited by
32
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
8.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (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 accuracy, misquotation, bibliographic errors, veterinary journals, citation errors, quotation errors, scientific integrity
MeSH terms
Periodicals as Topic, Veterinary Medicine

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