"Ghost" Publications among Applicants to a General Surgery Residency Program

Paul C. Kuo, Rebecca A. Schroeder, Anand Shah, Jatin Shah, Danny Jacobs, Ricardo Pietrobon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To determine the incidence of potentially fraudulent (or "ghost") publications in applications to a general surgery residency program. Methods: Electronic Residency Application Services applications submitted in 2005 to the general surgery residency program were reviewed in an IRB-approved study. No identifiers were collected. Publications were checked against Medline, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Google. Nonverifiable publications were then submitted to the medical librarian for verification. Ghost publications were defined as journals, books, or meetings that cannot be verified; verified journals without the listed publication; or verified publications without an applicant author. Data analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate regression analysis for nonparametric data. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Four hundred ninety-three applications were received. Thirty-one percent (150 of 493) of applicants listed a total of 596 publications, including 30 abstracts, 359 journal articles, and 207 chapters. Thirty-three percent (196 of 596) of the publications could not be verified: 7 abstracts, 177 journal articles, and 12 chapters. The distribution of ghost publications was skewed toward the journals subgroup (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of ghost publications were age and foreign medical school. The sole negative predictor was enrollment in a top-10 US research medical school. Conclusion: A disturbingly substantial fraction of publications listed on Electronic Residency Application Services applications cannot be verified. This might indicate a need for greater mentorship and oversight for medical school applicants. It is unknown whether this behavior predicts lack of integrity in other professional settings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)485-489
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume207
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Internship and Residency
Publications
Medical Schools
Librarians
Mentors
Research Ethics Committees
PubMed
Multivariate Analysis
Regression Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

"Ghost" Publications among Applicants to a General Surgery Residency Program. / Kuo, Paul C.; Schroeder, Rebecca A.; Shah, Anand; Shah, Jatin; Jacobs, Danny; Pietrobon, Ricardo.

In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons, Vol. 207, No. 4, 01.10.2008, p. 485-489.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kuo, Paul C. ; Schroeder, Rebecca A. ; Shah, Anand ; Shah, Jatin ; Jacobs, Danny ; Pietrobon, Ricardo. / "Ghost" Publications among Applicants to a General Surgery Residency Program. In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2008 ; Vol. 207, No. 4. pp. 485-489.
@article{be8ba3eaa923412d89941bcb43cec422,
title = "{"}Ghost{"} Publications among Applicants to a General Surgery Residency Program",
abstract = "Objective: To determine the incidence of potentially fraudulent (or {"}ghost{"}) publications in applications to a general surgery residency program. Methods: Electronic Residency Application Services applications submitted in 2005 to the general surgery residency program were reviewed in an IRB-approved study. No identifiers were collected. Publications were checked against Medline, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Google. Nonverifiable publications were then submitted to the medical librarian for verification. Ghost publications were defined as journals, books, or meetings that cannot be verified; verified journals without the listed publication; or verified publications without an applicant author. Data analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate regression analysis for nonparametric data. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Four hundred ninety-three applications were received. Thirty-one percent (150 of 493) of applicants listed a total of 596 publications, including 30 abstracts, 359 journal articles, and 207 chapters. Thirty-three percent (196 of 596) of the publications could not be verified: 7 abstracts, 177 journal articles, and 12 chapters. The distribution of ghost publications was skewed toward the journals subgroup (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of ghost publications were age and foreign medical school. The sole negative predictor was enrollment in a top-10 US research medical school. Conclusion: A disturbingly substantial fraction of publications listed on Electronic Residency Application Services applications cannot be verified. This might indicate a need for greater mentorship and oversight for medical school applicants. It is unknown whether this behavior predicts lack of integrity in other professional settings.",
author = "Kuo, {Paul C.} and Schroeder, {Rebecca A.} and Anand Shah and Jatin Shah and Danny Jacobs and Ricardo Pietrobon",
year = "2008",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.04.029",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "207",
pages = "485--489",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Surgeons",
issn = "1072-7515",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - "Ghost" Publications among Applicants to a General Surgery Residency Program

AU - Kuo, Paul C.

AU - Schroeder, Rebecca A.

AU - Shah, Anand

AU - Shah, Jatin

AU - Jacobs, Danny

AU - Pietrobon, Ricardo

PY - 2008/10/1

Y1 - 2008/10/1

N2 - Objective: To determine the incidence of potentially fraudulent (or "ghost") publications in applications to a general surgery residency program. Methods: Electronic Residency Application Services applications submitted in 2005 to the general surgery residency program were reviewed in an IRB-approved study. No identifiers were collected. Publications were checked against Medline, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Google. Nonverifiable publications were then submitted to the medical librarian for verification. Ghost publications were defined as journals, books, or meetings that cannot be verified; verified journals without the listed publication; or verified publications without an applicant author. Data analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate regression analysis for nonparametric data. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Four hundred ninety-three applications were received. Thirty-one percent (150 of 493) of applicants listed a total of 596 publications, including 30 abstracts, 359 journal articles, and 207 chapters. Thirty-three percent (196 of 596) of the publications could not be verified: 7 abstracts, 177 journal articles, and 12 chapters. The distribution of ghost publications was skewed toward the journals subgroup (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of ghost publications were age and foreign medical school. The sole negative predictor was enrollment in a top-10 US research medical school. Conclusion: A disturbingly substantial fraction of publications listed on Electronic Residency Application Services applications cannot be verified. This might indicate a need for greater mentorship and oversight for medical school applicants. It is unknown whether this behavior predicts lack of integrity in other professional settings.

AB - Objective: To determine the incidence of potentially fraudulent (or "ghost") publications in applications to a general surgery residency program. Methods: Electronic Residency Application Services applications submitted in 2005 to the general surgery residency program were reviewed in an IRB-approved study. No identifiers were collected. Publications were checked against Medline, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Google. Nonverifiable publications were then submitted to the medical librarian for verification. Ghost publications were defined as journals, books, or meetings that cannot be verified; verified journals without the listed publication; or verified publications without an applicant author. Data analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate regression analysis for nonparametric data. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Four hundred ninety-three applications were received. Thirty-one percent (150 of 493) of applicants listed a total of 596 publications, including 30 abstracts, 359 journal articles, and 207 chapters. Thirty-three percent (196 of 596) of the publications could not be verified: 7 abstracts, 177 journal articles, and 12 chapters. The distribution of ghost publications was skewed toward the journals subgroup (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of ghost publications were age and foreign medical school. The sole negative predictor was enrollment in a top-10 US research medical school. Conclusion: A disturbingly substantial fraction of publications listed on Electronic Residency Application Services applications cannot be verified. This might indicate a need for greater mentorship and oversight for medical school applicants. It is unknown whether this behavior predicts lack of integrity in other professional settings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=52949148956&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=52949148956&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.04.029

DO - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.04.029

M3 - Article

VL - 207

SP - 485

EP - 489

JO - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

JF - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

SN - 1072-7515

IS - 4

ER -