Citation rules through the eyes of biomedical journal editors
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2022 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Learned Publishing |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | webová stránka s odkazem na plný text v PDF |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/leap.1425 |
| Keywords | bibliographic references;citation styles;biomedical journals |
| Attached files | |
| Description | This research analysed the citations styles used in 1,100 high-impact biomedical journals and the importance attributed by their editors and other members of the editorial office to individual reference components, the citation format and method. We found 70 (6.5%) use the current American Medical Association or NLM/Vancouver style; 425 (39.2%) use their older versions or a variation; 73 (6.7%) use a standard non-biomedical style; and 432 (39.9%) have their own house style. According to 125 respondents who answered the survey, the most important reference components include the author(s), title and year of publication, while the date of update, date of access and language are among the least important. They prefer the citation-sequence method (65.6%) and the author-date method (24%). A comparison of the responses to the survey and the citation guidelines showed that while two-thirds of the respondents view the DOI and ISBN as important information, only a limited number of their journals' citation guidelines require them. Our results show that publishers, authors of standard styles and editors all agree that references should be uncomplicated and concise. A reduction in the number of various styles used might be attainable but would require an agreement between the publishers and authors of the standard styles, which would incorporate the preferences of journal editors. |