Bilingual (multilingual) publications and duplicate publications: for or against?

Abstract

In bioscience papers, besides the other scientific misconduct issues, replication of the method section is a common problem because duplication is always being detected in the section Materials and Methods. We editors often receive comments and queries from authors who think that it is a matter of course to copy their own published materials as opposed to copying those of others. How should editors handle such papers with similar content in the method section and how to guide authors in writing the method section without being accused of plagiarism? What is right? What is wrong? Here we studied an example to explain this problem. Suggestions Moreover, we also quote the useful words of a bio-scientist (Dr. McCanless) who suggested as follows: 1. If using kits and supplier is referenced, then this is enough due to most suppliers providing manuals. 2. If using traditional/homemade methods include following statement: “based on methods previously de- scribed” and include reference(s) as these procedures have all been documented in early chemis- try/biochemistry journals.....this is how we know how to do them. 3. If the procedure is novel or incorporates a novel step to a known method provide details (if the entire procedure is novel then a separate publication based on the method would be justified; if minor alterations are performed then state “based off [on] previously detailed protocols with the exception of...” Provide a reference for basic protocol and detail and innovative changes that were required to complete your experiment). We think the three suggestions would be very useful for the author(s) reference in the biomedicine and bio- technology areas.