A Questionnaire Survey of Domestic Anesthesiologists on the Ethics of Publishing

Abstract

Background: The importance of publication ethics has recently been emphasized. Therefore, inquiries regarding dual publications were analyzed to obtain basic data on whether domestic anesthetists recognized its importance and understood its practicalities. Methods: The data for the questionnaire was collected from doctors who participated in a review workshop with full consent. A total of 15 questions were classified into 3 categories: a general interest regarding the ethics of publication, personal objective opinions and reactivity toward an illegal act in this regard. Results: Thirty-eight participants responded spontaneously to the questionnaire. Thirty-six participants were aware of the principle of dual publications and 35 participants were aware of the contents in the home page. Twenty participants had contact with lectures or other media related to redundant publishing. Fourteen participants answered ‘yes’ regarding their colleague in an illegal action. However, 25 participants said that they were prepared to report an illegal act to the department or society .O nly 5 participants tried to take into consideration ethical issues of dual publication while 15 participants were tempted regarding dual publication while writing a paper. Twenty-seven participants agreed with the principle of duplicate or illegal publication. Thirty participants were prepared to have a consistent attitude toward any individual that committed a violation against publication ethics. Nineteen participants worried about the possibility of exposure of an illegal publication. Conclusions: According to the development of a watch system, dual publication can easily be detected. Regular education regarding publication ethics and notification to members to prevent an illegal act is necessary. (Korean J Anesthesiol 2008; 54: 557∼62)