|FROM THE EDITORS DESK
|Year : 2020 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 110
From the Editor's Desk
Editor JIAPHD, Assistant Professor, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
|Date of Submission||11-Jun-2020|
|Date of Acceptance||11-Jun-2020|
|Date of Web Publication||24-Jun-2020|
K R Sowmya
Editor JIAPHD, Assistant Professor, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Sowmya K R. From the Editor's Desk. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent 2020;18:110
Welcome to the second issue of the year 2020.
I sincerely thank all the authors, reviewers, editorial board members, office bearers of the IAPHD, all the members, Medknow, and readers for extending their continuous support and cooperation for bringing out the second issue of the year 2020 successfully.
The COVID-19 outbreak has posed serious challenges to India's healthcare community. From government think-tanks to global multilateral organizations, expert opinions and impact forecasts are being shared. Safe practices and best practices are being proposed across the board. Resilience, hope, and compassion are the need of the hour. In these challenging times, I appreciate the authors' commitment in submitting the manuscripts to our Journal.
We know that scientific research confers several benefits such as professional advancement, social status, and personal gratification. It is a testimony of scholarship and expertise besides serving as a yardstick for individual promotion and tenure decisions. Ethical research and publication practices are essential for scientific research. The adage “Publish or Perish” is a threatening reminder of the importance of publication in the today's scenario. We are noticing a combination of desperation and casual attitudes among some authors. Many submissions are made without following the instruction to authors.
Instances of overlapping publications are rising and triggering publication misconduct. It is considered unethical since it exaggerates the findings and wastes the times of editors, peer reviewers, and readers. Overlapping publication starts with duplicate submission often called self-plagiarism when authors submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one Journal.
Another phenomenon observed very often is that authors do duplicate publication or multiple publication that is the publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication. It is problematic because it can result in inadvertent double-counting of data, can skew meta-analyses and review articles, and can distort citation indexes.
Salami-tactic or redundant publication is very commonly reported nowadays. We comprehend that complex studies with many variables legitimize requiring more than one paper. On the other hand, almost overlapping publications may appear if too thin slices are made. Authors sometimes divide the objectives or publish interim analyses and come out with two publications, when in reality it can be avoided. As a part of the research fraternity, we should understand the gray-zone between double-publication and a thin cut. Most of the time authors take advantage of the gray-zone by showing subtle differences in the two publications. The author must inform the editors and should provide copies of the related material to enable the editor to decide how to handle the submission.