•  
  •  
 

Keywords

Clinical Practice in Athletic Training

Abstract

Context: Previous research has expounded on the importance of accurate use of references in scholarly manuscripts. A thorough and appropriate use of references allows authors to validate and lend credence to the position they are attempting to take on their subject matter.Reference errors have been well documented in multiple scholarly journals covering healthcare topics. To date, there does not appear to be a description of the accuracy of reference lists in sports medicine scholarly journal articles. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to describe the rate of reference errors in sports medicine literature. Methods: We examined four peer-reviewed sports medicine journals: Journal of Athletic Training (JAT), Athletic Training Education Journal (ATEJ), Clinical Practice in Athletic Training (ClinAT), and Journal of Sports Medicine and Allied Health Sciences (JSMAHS). We randomly selected 10 issues each from JAT and ATEJ, and five issues each from ClinAT and JSMAHS. This resulted in 262 articles, containing a total of 8,686 references being reviewed. Each citation was checked for grammar errors, as well as errors in the provided DOI number when applicable. Measures of central tendency (means, frequencies, and standard deviation) were calculated where applicable. Results: 13.7% (n=36) of articles had minor reference errors, and 3.1% (n=8) of articles had major reference errors. Overall, JAT presented with the fewest average citation errors per article compared with the other journals evaluated (JAT = 0.05 ± 0.22; ATEJ = 0.10 ± 0.30; ClinAT = 0.24 ± 0.50; JSMAHS = 0.88 ± 1.18). ClinAT and JSMAHS were the only journals that featured the regular reporting of DOI numbers for citations. While 13.1% (n=202) DOI numbers in ClinAT (3.52 ± 3.55 DOI errors per article) and JSMAHS (2.69 ± 4.25 DOI errors per article) did not take the investigators to the corresponding article, a number of these errors appeared to be due to the number not having a linked webpage from the host journal. Conclusion: While each scholarly journal evaluated contained at least some articles with minor or major reference errors, the relative number of errors was similar or lower than those found in scholarly journals in other healthcare professions. Fields including general surgery, neurosurgery, and nursing have all documented concerns related to citation accuracy in scholarly journals related to their area of study. As such, these findings are not an issue faced exclusively by athletic training and sports medicine professionals. Errors in references appear to be an issue for sports medicine scholarly publications. While the rate of error appears to be similar or better than other healthcare fields, there is still a need to improve reference accuracy in sports medicine scholarly writing.

Download

Share

COinS