Editors' Remarks

Abstract

Repeated publication of the same set of data or text, in different journals, is an unfortunately common practice. It is driven by several factors, including multiple requests for manuscripts based on symposia presentations that deal with a common theme. Most medical academics have engaged in this practice to some extent. Given that most copyright assignment forms allow the author(s) to continue to use published materials for personal and educational purposes, it may be unclear what is considered to be acceptable practice. “Self-duplication” may not appear to be as serious an issue as misappropriation of material by other authors (i.e., using work from other authors without permission and appropriate referencing). The American Medical Association Manual of Style, however, indicates that “duplicate publication or the submission of duplicate material is not necessarily unethical, but failure to disclose the existence of duplicate articles, manuscripts, or other material is unethical and may represent a violation of copyright law” (AMA Manual of Style, 9th Edition, 1998, p. 98). We were recently informed that the material contained in a paper published in Supplement 4 of the 2004 volume of Epilepsia (45 (Suppl.4): 41–42, 2004) was subsequently re-published in the Journal of Child Neurology (19:687–689, 2004). The Epilepsia paper was a case description based on the author's presentation at the 2003 American Epilepsy Society Annual Course. The J.Child.Neurol. paper was longer and involved additional material, but included the Epilepsia text almost word-for-word (>90% of the Epilepsia article was duplicated). Epilepsia Supplements, just as articles in the regular Journal pages, comprise peer-reviewed, Medline-indexed material, and should be handled with accepted scholarly standards. The Editors of Epilepsia urge our contributors to avoid extensive duplication of prior material in any work submitted to Epilepsia, or of any Epilepsia-published material in work submitted to other journals.