[Errors in bibliographic references in the Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación: retrospective study of 1994]

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the accuracy of bibliographic references in REVISTA ESPANOLA DE ANESTESIOLOGIA Y REANIMACION (REDAR) and compare it with other Spanish and international journals.

Material and methods: One hundred references were selected at random from those published in REDAR during 1994. A citation was considered correct if there were no differences between it and the original article in any of 6 standard citation times, and if it complied with REDAR citation style. A citation was considered incorrect if there were in fact differences or if REDAR style was not followed. Errors that interfered with direct access to the original were considered serious. Also considered serious were the omission of the first author.

Results: Some type of error was detected in 53.9% of the references. Twelve contained a serious error, which on 5 occasions impeded finding the original article and on 6 occasions made direct access difficult. The first author was missing in 1 citation. Errors were found, in order of decreasing frequency, in authors, article titles, journal title, volume, pages and year. A single error was found in 28 citations, 2 were found in 12, 3 were found in 2 and more than 3 were found in 1.

Conclusions: REDAR's rate of error in references is comparable to the rates of other Spanish journal, but it is nearly double that of international journals in anesthesiology with higher impact factors (Anesthesiology, Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia). An effort must be made by authors and editors to remedy the situation.